Prayers - 
[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Virtual participation in proceedings commenced (Order, 4 June).
[NB: [V] denotes a Member participating virtually.]

Oral
Answers to
Questions

Cabinet Office

The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Minister for the Cabinet Office was asked—

Strengthening the Union

Ben Everitt: What steps the Government are taking to strengthen the Union.

Douglas Chapman: What assessment he has made of the effect of trends in the level of support for Scottish independence on his policies on strengthening the Union.

Michael Gove: Mr Speaker, may I wish you and the whole House a safe and happy Christmas, on this, the last scheduled day of the Session?
The Government are committed to protecting and promoting the combined strengths of our Union, building on 300 years of partnership. It is vital that we continue to work across the UK on the challenges that we all face together, such as our recovery from covid-19, and to focus on issues such as protecting jobs and supporting the NHS.

Ben Everitt: I thank my right hon. Friend for that answer. Perhaps he will agree that there can be no better example of the strength of our Union and of all four nations—the awesome foursome—working together than the successful funding, deployment, roll-out and creation of covid-19 vaccines, keeping communities safe across all four nations.

Michael Gove: My hon. Friend makes a vital point. Across all four nations of the United Kingdom people are being vaccinated thanks to the energetic efforts of the vaccine taskforce, my right hon. Friend the Secretary State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy and, of course, our superb NHS. It is a source of particular pleasure to me that Scotland is enjoying that vaccine thanks to the efforts of the UK Government: proof that our NHS means that we are stronger together.

Douglas Chapman: Today, a poll revealed that 58% of Scots would vote for independence. This is the 17th consecutive poll to show a positive result and we   are seeing a rise in support for independence across all age groups. The Cabinet Office can hoist as many Union flags as it wants, but what part of “We are leaving” does the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster not understand?

Michael Gove: Of course, surveys of opinion are always fascinating, but the figures that I am interested in are those which show that the UK Government are spending more per capita in Scotland than they are in other parts of the United Kingdom and that thousands of Scots are now being vaccinated thanks to the efforts of the UK Government. If we look at a map of the world to see which countries are having their citizens vaccinated, Scotland, Northern Ireland, Wales and England are ahead of the pack: stronger together.

Lindsay Hoyle: Can we have the SNP spokesperson, Pete Wishart?

Pete Wishart: You most certainly can, Mr Speaker, and thank you.
I listened carefully to the right hon. Gentleman’s answer, and yes, we are grateful for the vaccine, but I did not hear a response as to why he thinks that Scottish independence has now become the settled will of the Scottish people. This is not like him. He is usually quick to give his views about certain things, so why does he think that Scottish independence has sustained majority support, reaching a height of 58%, and is now the settled will of the Scottish people? Why is that the case?

Michael Gove: It is great to have the hon. Gentleman here, live and unplugged, rather than having to rely on a distant video screen, because his performance is always one that we savour. Sadly, however, I fear that his reliance on opinion polls is no substitute for his aversion to hard arguments. Why will he not engage with the facts? The facts show that, in Scotland, per capita spending including on our shared NHS is greater as a result of the broad shoulders of the UK Treasury. As I pointed out earlier, but as he declined to acknowledge, folk in Scotland are being vaccinated now, thanks to the efforts of the UK Government in a world-leading programme. I hope that, in the spirit of Christmas, he will acknowledge that this is a time for giving, and that he will, just once, give the benefit of the doubt to the UK Government.

Pete Wishart: I am likely to be the ghost of Christmas future, because it is not going the right hon. Gentleman’s way. Let me try to give him a few reasons. Let us see if he agrees with any of these: the disastrous Brexit that Scotland did not vote for; the attacks on our democracy; the undermining of our Parliament; and the Prime Minister—him. Maybe they are some of the reasons that we are now in the lead, but the main one is the arrogantly Trumpian way in which the right hon. Gentleman says no to a majority in a democracy. Does he think that constantly saying no to a majority in Scotland will drive support for independence down, or will it only further drive support for independence up?

Michael Gove: The Scottish Parliament is enjoying more powers now as a result of our departure from the European Union. Those powers allow the devolved legislature to have its own agriculture and environment policy, to supplement the leadership that it has been  showing in other areas. As we move towards the elections that are coming next year, many people will focus on the record of the Scottish Government. Of course there are admirable Ministers in the Scottish Government, but people will be asking why the UK Government are responsible for vaccinating people in Scotland and yet the Scottish Government are responsible for a decline in educational achievement in Scotland’s schools and a growing divide between the well-off and less well-off. Social justice matters, and that is why, in the forthcoming Scottish parliamentary elections, the Scottish Conservatives will be making gains at the hon. Gentleman’s expense.

UK-EU Negotiations

Dehenna Davison: What recent assessment he has made of the effectiveness of negotiations on the UK’s future relationship with the EU.

Sheryll Murray: What recent assessment he has made of the effectiveness of negotiations on the UK’s future relationship with the EU.

Sally-Ann Hart: What recent assessment he has made of the effectiveness of negotiations on the UK’s future relationship with the EU.

Michael Gove: With your permission, Mr Speaker, I will take questions 5, 6 and 7 together, because they are such good questions. They really are superb questions, and it is only right that they be taken together, in a one-er, in a group, as a collective. Intensive talks are ongoing, with both negotiating teams working day and night to reach a deal. We are going the extra mile and continuing the negotiations to see whether an agreement can be reached, and we will of course continue to keep Parliament informed on our progress.

Dehenna Davison: I thank my right hon. Friend for his slightly delayed answer. He showed last week how successful the UK Government can be in negotiating with the EU, in their successful agreement in the Joint Committee. Will he therefore confirm that, although he has shown that the UK can do a deal with the EU, the Government will only conclude a deal on a free trade agreement that is in the best interests of our country and will be willing to walk away if they have no other choice?

Michael Gove: My hon. Friend is right; even if sometimes results are coming later than we might have wanted, I know that we will be doing everything to secure a good free trade agreement in the interests of the whole United Kingdom. The electors of Bishop Auckland, whom she represents so brilliantly, were clear when they voted to leave the EU that we need to do so by 31 December, and we will.

Sheryll Murray: Does my right hon. Friend agree that the Opposition’s apparent position of agreeing a deal no matter what is a ridiculous one to take during any negotiation?

Michael Gove: My hon. Friend is right; the Opposition party has taken a number of different position on Brexit over the past few months, weeks and perhaps even days, but one thing that has never been clear is where exactly its red lines are. Ours are clear: we will always stand up for the United Kingdom. May I also pay tribute to my hon. Friend for the magnificent way in which she stood up for our coastal communities and fishing sector? Outside the common fisheries policy they will prosper, thanks to her.

Sally-Ann Hart: Fishing is reportedly a sticking point in the negotiations. My local fishermen in Hastings and Rye need to have faith that this Conservative Government will not sacrifice them, as previous Governments have, for free trade with the EU. Can I be confident in reassuring them that this Government will provide the basis for trust to be restored and built upon?

Michael Gove: Yes; my hon. Friend does an excellent job in standing up for her constituents in Hastings and Rye. The fishermen she represents so effectively know that we, as an independent coastal state, will be in control of our waters at the end of the transition period. Of course we want to make sure that we manage shared stocks in an appropriate way with all of our neighbours, including those outside the EU, but as an independent coastal state we are in control.

Hilary Benn: We all wish the negotiators well in this final stage, as they demonstrate that sharing sovereignty—gaining benefits by accepting obligations—is what will be required in order to reach the agreement that the Government say they want and which we all want. Can the right hon. Gentleman tell the House whether the legislation that will be required to give effect to any agreement will need to pass all of its stages in Parliament by 31 December this year in order to provide clarity to individual businesses about what they can do from 1 January next year, which is, after all, only 15 days away?

Michael Gove: The right hon. Gentleman reminds us all of the importance of seeking to conclude these negotiations as quickly as possible. If they are concluded satisfactorily, we will request that the House returns in order to make sure that we can legislate effectively. We believe we can pass the necessary legislation before 31 December to give businesses legal certainty for the future.

Paul Blomfield: This is how the Prime Minister described his oven-ready deal last November:
“put it in Gas Mark 4, 20 minutes and Bob’s your uncle.”
The Minister is nodding. Clearly, the Government have delivered half of it—leaving the European Union—but we have now passed six of the Prime Minister’s deadlines for the other half, which is the agreement on our new relationship with the EU. In those same comments last November, the Prime Minister promised to end “dither and delay”. This week, we have heard of companies that have stopped exporting to the EU because of the uncertainty created by the Government’s handling of these negotiations. Has the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster made an assessment of how many jobs have been lost through their incompetence?

Michael Gove: I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for reminding us that the Prime Minister not only secured a handsome election victory just over a year ago but did so on the basis of having secured a withdrawal agreement that passed this House, which meant that we left the European Union in January. Part of that withdrawal agreement was a protocol on Northern Ireland; some doubted that we would be able to reach a satisfactory conclusion, but we did. Others doubt that we will be able to have a satisfactory cause for celebration at the end of this year, when the transition period ends; I invite the hon. Gentleman to wait and see on that.

Paul Blomfield: I think we are all waiting to see.
Let me ask the Minister about a different part of the negotiations. When I have asked him previously, he has been unable to confirm that we will have access to the real-time information systems that we need to identify foreign criminals at our borders. We both understand why the Government’s position has prevented him from giving that confirmation. This morning, speaking on Radio 4 just over an hour ago, the Home Secretary was pressed on the issue and said:
“All the type of channels that we have used in the past we will continue to use going forward.”
Was she right? Anything less than an unequivocal endorsement will indicate that she was not.

Michael Gove: The Home Secretary is always right.

Blind and Partially Sighted People: Voting

Liz Twist: What assessment his Department has made of the accessibility of voting for blind and partially sighted people.

Penny Mordaunt: The Government are committed to ensuring that elections are accessible for all those eligible to vote and have been working with the Royal National Institute of Blind People to improve the voting process for blind and partially sighted people.

Liz Twist: What steps is the Minister taking to introduce the recommendations made in the RNIB’s most recent report, which found that only one in 10 blind voters and less than half of partially sighted voters could vote independently and in secret in the 2019 general election?

Penny Mordaunt: I thank the hon. Lady for raising this important issue and for the work she has done on improving the situation. We have been working intensively with the RNIB. Any systems and reforms that are brought in do need to be tested, and it is unfortunate that the cancellation of the elections this year has meant that we have not had that opportunity. But we will do next year. We are determined that, whether someone wants to vote in person or via post, they have a method of doing so that meets their needs and is secure.

UK Preparedness: End of Transition

Christine Jardine: If he will negotiate a phased period of implementation for new trading rules after the end of the transition period.

Rupa Huq: What recent assessment he has made of the adequacy of the UK’s preparedness for the end of the transition period.

Chris Elmore: What steps the Government are taking to (a) maintain jobs and (b) support businesses at the end of the transition period.

Michael Gove: The Government have been clear that the transition period will end on 31 December. We have made extensive preparations for a wide range of outcomes, including through a package of support for border infrastructure and the customs intermediary sector, and, of course, the phased implementation of border controls. A trader support service is also in place to help businesses trading under the Northern Ireland protocol, and we are scaling up the provision of Government helplines.

Christine Jardine: A great deal of concern has been expressed to me by local businesses in Edinburgh West, and there are national concerns among industries such as the whisky sector, about the difficulties businesses are having with things like not knowing how they should label products given that there is, as yet, no clarity about our future relationship with the European Union. Anything that the Government can do to extend the period of adjustment would be appreciated by businesses and would help to offset the Scottish National party drive towards breaking up the United Kingdom, about which I know the Government share my concern.

Michael Gove: The hon. Lady is absolutely right; we need to do everything we can to support businesses in Scotland and elsewhere. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for International Trade is doing everything she can to help the whisky sector, not least through discussions with the US trade representative, Robert Lighthizer. More broadly, we want to make sure, in the free trade agreement that we seek, that there can be a smooth glide path for businesses in Scotland and elsewhere. I look forward to continuing to work with the hon. Lady. She has been a consistent voice for Scotland’s businesses, both in the House and before she came to the Commons, and her advocacy, free of any partisan agenda, is something of which her constituents should be proud.

Rupa Huq: The Minister is forever the smooth talker, as we saw in his answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield Central (Paul Blomfield), but how exactly will our police access those real-time Schengen most-wanted criminal databases in 14 days’ time? With 15,000 UK extradition requests in both directions last year alone under the European arrest warrant, how can he guarantee that, when we leave, Britain does not become a safe haven for murderers, rapists, terrorists and other cross-border criminals? People want precision on prosperity and security and, frankly, his one-liners are not good enough.

Michael Gove: I try not to weary the House with over-long answers. On the hon. Lady’s substantive point, it is the case that we have extensive security and law enforcement and justice co-operation with our friends in the European Union and, indeed, beyond and we will make use of all the instruments necessary in order to keep people safe.

Chris Elmore: The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster will know that, last week, my Ogmore constituents received a hammer blow with the news that INEOS has decided to pull out of building their 4x4s, which had been promised by the ardent Brexiteer, Jim Ratcliffe. The irony that INEOS’s owner was such a vocal supporter of Brexit and has now fled to France to build his 4x4s has not been lost on any of my hard-working and highly skilled constituents. What assurances can the Minister give me that he is working to try to bring about more support for job growth in highly skilled manufacturing that can work for the people of south Wales?

Michael Gove: The hon. Gentleman makes a very important point. It is the case that, in South Wales, there is a concentration of skilled workers in advanced manufacturing who are the pride of the world. It is also the case, of course, that General Dynamics in Merthyr Tydfil, which is new to his constituency, is receiving support and investment from the defence industrial strategy. I look forward to working with him and indeed with the Welsh Government to ensure that his constituents can prosper in the future. It is absolutely vital that we work together to ensure that the skilled workers of the valleys have the bright future that they deserve.

UK-EU Negotiations: Devolved Administrations

John Lamont: What recent discussions the Government have had with the devolved Administrations on the UK’s trade negotiations with the EU.

Michael Gove: It is the case that I have regular contact with Ministers in the devolved Administrations in order to ensure that we can work effectively together in our negotiations with the EU,  the last of which was on 3 December, when the Joint Ministerial Committee on EU negotiations met.

John Lamont: Despite its warm words about being pro-trade, the Scottish National party has consistently voted against or abstained on trade deals coming before this House. Does the Minister agree that international trade is essential for supporting jobs across Scotland, and that by failing to support these trade deals the SNP is letting down workers across Scotland?

Michael Gove: My hon. Friend is absolutely right. As has been pointed out by the Minister of Trade at this Dispatch Box on a number of occasions and, as he has reminded us, the SNP has never found a trade deal that it could vote for or like at any point. It is also the case that it wants to erect barriers between Scotland and its biggest trading partner—the rest of the United Kingdom. Trade brings prosperity. The SNP is not in favour of trade and therefore not in favour of Scotland’s prosperity.

Regional Equality

Craig Whittaker: What progress the Government have made on ensuring regional equality of economic opportunity.

Robert Largan: What progress the Government have made on ensuring regional equality of economic opportunity.

Amanda Milling: It is just over a year since the general election and this Government are as committed to regional equality and creating economic opportunity as we were last December. In the face of covid-19, the Government have taken unprecedented fiscal action to support all regions and nations of the UK through the crisis, working to ensure that we protect jobs and businesses, minimise damage to the economy and deliver the right support as needed.

Craig Whittaker: The Calder Valley has more than 19% of its workforce in the manufacturing sector and a further 26% in the financial sector. Both sectors have been hard hit by the pandemic. Can my hon. Friend say what steps the Government have taken to boost employment in the Calder Valley and in West Yorkshire, particularly as we emerge from the shadow of the pandemic?

Amanda Milling: I am very grateful to my hon. Friend for his question on the importance of employment in the Calder Valley. I am sure that he will be pleased to learn that the Conservative party will be personally boosting employment in West Yorkshire when we open our new headquarters in Leeds next year. More broadly, the Government have announced unprecedented support across the whole of Britain to help unemployed people find a job, including the £2 billion kickstart scheme for young people and the £2.9 billion restart programme to help those unemployed for more than a year. We are doubling the number of work coaches.

Robert Largan: High Peak has a covid case rate lower than the national average yet is in tier 3. This is having a very severe effect on our local hospitality industry, which is so central to our economy. Can the Minister assure me that she is working with colleagues across Government to provide all necessary support to those businesses and to work to get High Peak out of tier 3 as fast as possible?

Amanda Milling: My hon. Friend is a very strong voice for his constituents in High Peak. Tier 3 restrictions were introduced based on evidence from the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies about what was required to bring the R rate below 1 in a targeted way, thereby bringing transmission under control and reducing pressures on the NHS. Local authorities under tier 3 measures such as those in High Peak also receive additional funding for local public health initiatives to help to contain the spread of the virus and pave the way for local restrictions to be eased.

Covid-19: Consultants

Clive Lewis: What plans he has to review the value for money of the Government’s use of consultants during the covid-19 outbreak.

Andrew Gwynne: What plans he has to review the value for money of the Government’s use of consultants during the covid-19 outbreak.

Margaret Greenwood: What assessment he has made of the effectiveness of Government outsourcing during the covid-19 outbreak.

Julia Lopez: With your permission, Mr Speaker, I will croak through these Questions together.
Working effectively with the private sector, including external consultants, has undoubtedly helped us to address some of the huge challenges the pandemic served up, but contracting authorities must extract value for money for taxpayers when working in this way. The outsourcing playbook updated in June includes many key policies to improve the quality of contracts in place with industry, but also to build internal civil service capability to reduce our reliance on external consultants.

Clive Lewis: [Inaudible.]

Lindsay Hoyle: We will try to come back to you, Clive.

Andrew Gwynne: The National Audit Office’s investigation into Government procurement during the pandemic reflects the chaotic culture of outsourcing across Government. Contracts have been awarded after work has begun without competition and without any meaningful due diligence checks. How can the public have any trust in the Government’s response if the Government are not transparent with them?

Julia Lopez: The National Audit Office set out a number of recommendations that we will be looking into, but the idea that we did not need to contract under emergency terms during the pandemic is inaccurate, and there are rules in place to allow us to do that. We have been slow to publish contracts because we experienced some problems, which I set out in the Westminster Hall debate last week, but we now have 100% of those contracts for the relevant bodies.

Margaret Greenwood: The Good Law Project estimates that £1.6 billion-worth of contracts for covid-19 services have yet to be published, and details of contracts are consistently being published late. This is despite the fact that there is a legal requirement for those details to be published no more than 30 days after the contract is awarded. The Government are clearly failing in their duties. What is the Minister going to do to improve transparency in Government procurement?

Julia Lopez: We have now published in full all the contracts for personal protective equipment. There are some difficulties in doing that, which, as I say, I set out last week in the Westminster Hall debate. This week we have launched a Green Paper on public procurement, and we will be introducing a number of changes to our existing procurement regime when the transition period is over, which will improve the way we do things in future.

Helen Hayes: The Minister mentions the Green Paper on procurement, which the Government published this week. The foreword to the Green Paper acknowledges the need to
“strengthen our longstanding and essential principles…of transparency, ensuring value for money and fair treatment of suppliers.”
With serious concerns being raised about the multiple contracts awarded by the Government, with no competition, to companies with strong connections to the Tory party and no clear track record of delivery, will the Minister put those warm words into action now and extend the Freedom of Information Act to all private companies, such as Serco, delivering public services?

Julia Lopez: I am not sure what the implications of extending FOI would be in terms of commercial confidentiality, but I am happy to look into that for the hon. Lady. The Green Paper is there to reassure and to deal with some of the problems we have had during the pandemic, where we have either had a full-fat tender that takes far too long in an emergency situation, or a situation of direct award. I am happy to look into her suggestion.

Lindsay Hoyle: Let us head back to Norwich South and hope Alan Partridge does not get in the way of me hearing Clive Lewis.

Clive Lewis: Thank you, Mr Speaker; I can be heard at last. Given that this Government have doled out £10.5 billion of our money without any competition, according to the National Audit Office, and frittered hundreds of millions on consultants and individuals whose main qualification seems to be that they are friends with members of this Government, does the Minister agree that in any other part of the world it would be called corruption, plain and simple?

Julia Lopez: I would not agree. It is very important to understand that every contract went through the same eight-stage process, where it was looked into. The contracts were done on the grounds of commercial sense, rather than anything to do with any connections. As the NAO report said, Ministers declared all interests and there was no evidence of any wrongdoing.

May 2021 Local Elections: Covid-19

Kate Osborne: What plans the Government have to ensure that the May 2021 local elections are covid-19 secure.

Navendu Mishra: What plans the Government has to ensure that the May 2021 local elections are covid-19 secure.

Penny Mordaunt: The UK Government are working with local returning officers, the Electoral Commission and public health bodies to identify and resolve the challenges involved in delivering the elections next May.

Kate Osborne: The May 2021 elections will see a record number of different elections with various different voting systems all taking place on the same day. In normal times this would pose an immense logistical challenge, without the added complications brought about by the pandemic. Will the Minister outline why the Government have ruled out an all-postal ballot and refused to make any legislative changes to consider any new forms of voting, as we have seen across the globe?

Penny Mordaunt: I thank the hon. Lady for pointing out the extreme challenges that exist to ensure that the elections can take place in a covid-secure environment. They are considerable, but they cannot compromise the security and integrity of the ballot, and we feel that by moving to an all-postal system, that may be the case. We want people to be able to vote in person or by post, and we want them to do that in a covid-secure way, and that is what we and our partners are working towards.

Navendu Mishra: I know from my own experience that a large proportion of electoral staff and volunteers is made up from the demographic that would be considered vulnerable, with many retired and older people volunteering. If the Government have refused to provide any more funding for the running of the May 2021 elections, what steps are they taking to ensure that there is not a huge shortage of electoral staff?

Penny Mordaunt: One of the partners we are working with is public health organisations and authorities, and the hon. Gentleman is absolutely right: we want to ensure that everyone, whether they are officers or volunteers, is safe. We also anticipate, for example, that we will have extra demands on postal votes and so forth, and we are determined to ensure that we have the supply to meet that demand, but the issues that he raises are at the forefront of our minds.

Cat Smith: My hon. Friend the Member for Jarrow (Kate Osborne) set out the scale of these elections very clearly. With less than five months to go until these major polls right across the United Kingdom, I hope the Minister will be able to respond to some questions that are on the minds of electoral administrators, campaigners and, most importantly, voters. Will voters be required to wear face coverings in polling stations? If so, will polling clerks be expected to enforce that, and what resources will they get to do that? If they are not required to wear face coverings, what protections will be put in place to protect staff in polling stations? What steps are the Government taking to ensure that we have adequate staffing at polling stations? As my hon. Friend the Member for Stockport (Navendu Mishra) set out—and I do not think the Minister adequately answered his question—so many of our volunteers are from an older demographic, and if the vaccine programme is not sufficiently rolled out, we face a shortage of staff.

Penny Mordaunt: I thank the hon. Lady for raising those issues. Hopefully, we will be in a happier place when the elections arrive because of the vaccination programme, but she raises some important issues. Just as retailers, healthcare settings and so forth have put in place measures to make them covid-secure, whether those are public health-related measures or the enforcement and policing of them, we will do the same at polling stations and at counts. We will ensure that there will still be the transparency that people want through scrutineers and so forth. We will also introduce some slight legislative changes to enable, for example, somebody who has to isolate very close to the election to still be able to cast their vote. We are working through all these issues with those organisations methodically, and we will have those elections. They will be safe, and they will still have integrity.

Electoral Fraud

Tom Randall: What discussions he has had with the Electoral Commission on tackling electoral fraud.

Penny Mordaunt: Ministers and officials engage with the Electoral Commission on a regular basis about work to support the effective and secure running of elections at a local and parliamentary level. We will continue to work with the Electoral  Commission to ensure that all elections that take place in the UK are both fair and free of any electoral fraud or attempted electoral fraud.

Tom Randall: I thank my right hon. Friend for her answer. In his judgment against the former Tower Hamlets Mayor Lutfur Rahman for electoral fraud, Richard Mawrey QC found that one council candidate had, in the space of six weeks, fought two wards in the same borough using two different names and two different false addresses. That fact came to light not through investigation by the authorities but because local residents were able to inspect copies of the electoral register under supervision. That right seems to have been thrown into doubt because of confusing guidance issued by the Electoral Commission. Could my right hon. Friend get in touch with the chief executive of the Electoral Commission to ensure that clear guidance is issued, so that members of the public looking into these measures do not find themselves prevented from accessing copies under supervision and that further cases they are looking into can come to light?

Penny Mordaunt: My hon. Friend raises a very important issue. Let me be crystal clear: the law is absolutely clear on this. Anyone can inspect copies of the current register under supervision. The register is a public document to enable concerned citizens, such as those he refers to, to check that registers only include those who are properly eligible. I will, of course, look into the matter that he raised, because we want clarity on this very important point.

British Nuclear Test Veterans

Carol Monaghan: What criteria was used by the Advisory Military Sub-Committee to inform its decision not to recommend a service medal award for British nuclear test veterans.

Johnny Mercer: The independent Advisory Military Sub-Committee first considers whether there are exceptional circumstances that merit a review. The criteria for historical recognition are the exposure of deployed personnel to a significant degree of risk to life and limb and to arduous conditions, in excess of what might be expected as part of normal service duties.

Carol Monaghan: The UK is the only country that performed nuclear tests that has not formally recognised the contribution of its 20,000 nuclear test veterans. These elderly veterans, who were exposed to ionising radiation with no protection, have heard decades of rhetoric about their bravery, but without formal recognition, those are simply hollow words. Members on both sides of the House know that these veterans deserve a campaign medal, but his Department continues to refuse that modest request. Why does the Minister consider these veterans unworthy of a medal?

Johnny Mercer: I am afraid that there were a number of inaccuracies in the hon. Member’s question. It is not my Department, and we are not the only country in the world that has this view. Only this summer, I met the chairman of the veterans group concerned and asked Veterans UK—this is separate from the medallic recognition scheme—to revisit and redesign the support available to our nuclear test veterans. I understand the disappointment  at this decision. It is not within my gift. My job is to make sure these people are looked after properly. I am confident we are doing that. Again, I am happy to meet campaign groups to see what more we can do.

Civil Service Jobs

Saqib Bhatti: What steps he is taking to increase the proportion of civil service jobs based outside London.

Scott Benton: What steps he is taking to increase the proportion of civil service jobs based outside London.

Julia Lopez: We want to make the administration of government much less Whitehall-centric and more reflective of the country as a whole. The Government are committed to an ambition to relocate 22,000 civil service roles out of the capital and into the regions and nations of the UK by the end of this decade. Our Places for Growth programme envisages a series of hub locations, with additional aligned offices within travelling distance of those hubs, and we hope this will deliver on our levelling-up ambitions.

Saqib Bhatti: Does my hon. Friend agree with me that the west midlands is the perfect place to welcome a Government Department, and will she pay tribute to the Mayor of the West Midlands, Andy Street, who has been working with Cabinet Office Minister Lord Agnew to make sure that we can take advantage of the economic investment and employment opportunities that relocation would bring to the west midlands?

Julia Lopez: I thank my hon. Friend for his question. He has a fantastic record of championing employment and investment in his region from his time with the Greater Birmingham Chambers of Commerce and with the launch this month of his business forum. It is great to see him working hand in glove with the West Midlands Mayor, Andy Street, and I am very confident that, when we are ready to make the announcements on Places for Growth, the west midlands will benefit from this very exciting agenda.

Scott Benton: Does my hon. Friend agree with me that for Government to be able to make the best decisions for local communities, civil servants and Government Departments should be based across the whole country, including in Blackpool, as this will allow the Government to truly represent the diverse nature of many of the communities across our United Kingdom? In that vein, will my hon. Friend meet me to discuss the different opportunities that relocating Government Departments can bring to Blackpool?

Julia Lopez: I thank my hon. Friend for his question. He is a fantastic champion of Blackpool, and it has been great to see icons of civic pride, such as the Tower ballroom, secure culture funds thanks to his efforts. I wholeheartedly agree with him that the Government must be better connected to the communities we serve, and that really is the thrust of the Places for Growth programme. I am happy to meet him if he wishes to set out how his town can help in that agenda.

Office for Veterans’ Affairs

Duncan Baker: What recent assessment he has made of the effectiveness of the Office for Veterans’ Affairs.

Johnny Mercer: The Office for Veterans’ Affairs has fundamentally changed this country’s offer to our veterans, pulling together all functions of Government to really understand the veterans’ experience in this country. Briefly, I would like to pay tribute to all my colleagues who have supported us in that endeavour this year, particularly in this most difficult of years, during which I am confident that we have changed more than ever as we try to do our duty by those who have served.

Duncan Baker: I thank my hon. Friend for what he is doing for veterans. Service leavers since 8 January this year will have been given their veterans ID cards to mark their time in the armed forces, but will veterans who left before December 2018 still be able to apply for their card by the end of 2020? Will he update the House about those veterans who are looking forward to getting their card?

Johnny Mercer: I thank my hon. Friend for his question. The veterans ID card is an important policy that this Government have brought forward. He is absolutely right that those who leave now will get an ID card. What we have struggled with is the verification of those who have served. The military, unfortunately, has been dealing with paper records for a number of years. That is changing, with the significant investments that we have funnelled into organisations such as Veterans UK. The ambition is to deliver this project once we have got to a place where we can prevent fraud and similar things, so that every veteran who has served gets their veterans ID card and is recognised in the way that this Prime Minister would want.

United Kingdom Internal Market Bill: Strength of Union

Neil Gray: What assessment he has made of the effect on the strength of the Union of the United Kingdom Internal Market Bill.

Michael Gove: For centuries, the ability to trade freely without barriers across the United Kingdom has been the cornerstone of our shared prosperity, and the United Kingdom Internal Market Bill will help to maintain this integrated market to ensure the free flow of goods and services throughout the UK.

Neil Gray: The majority support for independence in the last 17 polls in a row—58% this morning—is in part due to how Scotland has been treated by the Minister and his colleagues since the Brexit referendum. It is exemplified by the dictatorial United Kingdom Internal Market Bill, which rips the devolution settlement apart and is now the subject of legal challenge. Why are the UK Government unilaterally legislating without legislative consent with the United Kingdom Internal Market Bill when the required common frameworks could have been negotiated with the devolved nations, as they are still at the table?

Michael Gove: I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his question. As he knows, I am a great admirer of him and of his colleague Alex Neil. One of the things about the approach that we are taking is that common frameworks work alongside the internal market Bill. Indeed, the House of Lords confirmed that approach just this week.

Topical Questions

Jonathan Edwards: If he will make a statement on his departmental responsibilities.

Michael Gove: The House will know that last week I made a statement confirming that vice-president Maroš Šefčovič of the European Commission and I had reached agreement in principle on the implementation of the Northern Ireland protocol. As set out in my written statement issued yesterday, I am pleased to say that vice-president Šefčovič and I shall be meeting again later today in a formal session of the withdrawal agreement Joint Committee. I look forward to updating the House on the outcome of that meeting.

Jonathan Edwards: I was contacted late last night by a businessman in my constituency who is reliant on imports from the continent. He cannot find a haulage firm willing to carriage on his behalf, due to the current delays at the ports. He is very concerned; unless this issue is resolved, his business will not survive into the new year. What is the Minister’s advice to my constituent?

Michael Gove: I know what a diligent constituency Member the hon. Gentleman is. If he gets in touch with my office, I will be directly in touch with the business concerned.

Steve Double: The recent announcement by the Chancellor of a £220 million pilot scheme for the shared prosperity fund is a welcome step forward. However, there are some in Cornwall who claim that this is a sign that the Government will break their commitment to match the funding that places such as Cornwall received through the EU. Can my right hon. Friend confirm that the Government are committed to replacing EU funding, which amounted to £1.5 billion per year, in full, and that, as the Prime Minister has stated, Cornwall will receive its share in a dedicated pot?

Michael Gove: I can absolutely reassure my hon. Friend that, as set out at the spending review, funding for the UK shared prosperity fund will be increased so that it at least matches the EU receipts on average, which reached around £1.5 billion a year. We will publish a UK-wide framework in the spring, which will set out full details, and to help local areas prepare for the introduction of the SPF, we are providing the additional £220 million that my hon. Friend referred to. Of course, we will work closely with Cornwall to ensure that it gets the funding that it needs and for which he is such an effective advocate.

Rachel Reeves: The UK’s ports are our gateway to the world. Yesterday, the port infrastructure fund was finally announced. We found out that Dover did not get the £33 million that it asked  for; instead, it got just £33,000. Portsmouth faces a shortfall of £8 million. The Minister recently visited that port, so he knows its huge importance. Why have the Government short-changed vital infrastructure critical to the everyday economy, while at the same time wasting millions of pounds on consultants and middlemen as part of Tory cronyism?

Michael Gove: The hon. Lady raises an important issue. The funding in the port infrastructure fund was specifically available for projects that were due to be delivered by July next year, when full import controls will be in place. Dover was bidding for some infrastructure that would be complete by 2023, which is intended, of course, to take advantage of the new opportunities that control over our borders will bring. We are working with Dover to ensure that a new approach towards juxtaposed controls can be in place.
We are also working with Portsmouth. Portsmouth port is not unique, but it is certainly singular in that it is owned by the local authority, which does a very good job. We are working with the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, the Department for Transport and others to ensure that not just the port but the broader infrastructure in Portsmouth and that part of Hampshire is sufficient for the needs of port users.

Rachel Reeves: I thank the Minister for that answer, but he needs to give greater assurances that there will not be the delays and disruption that we all fear. A letter from the Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office, the hon. Member for Hornchurch and Upminster (Julia Lopez), to my hon. Friend the Member for Portsmouth South (Stephen Morgan) states:
“Ministers…decided that all bids which are recommended to be supported will be funded to 66%”.
Not 100%, but just 66%. What a false economy given the cost to British businesses and consumers of delays and disruption at the border. Will the Government publish the full rationale for each of their 53 port decisions, not least since some companies received next to nothing while one port company, which coincidentally pays a former Tory Cabinet Minister £100,000 a year, was awarded £26 million yesterday by this Government?

Michael Gove: Of course, we would be delighted to make sure that the full assessment criteria are shared with the hon. Lady and with all constituency Members. The port infrastructure team had an independent team to look at the eligibility of all the ports that applied and to assess all the bids. They were done on the most rigorous of bases. It is the case that a number of ports have welcomed the additional funding and the additional infrastructure support it will give, but we will continue to work with all ports to ensure we can have a world-class border. The publication today of our future border plan for 2025 lays out the means by which we will do so.

Peter Aldous: The year 2021 will bring significant opportunities for coastal communities such as Lowestoft to drive forward the covid recovery in the energy, fishing, food and trade sectors. Will my right hon. Friend outline the steps he is taking to ensure that the promotion of investment in ports, manufacturing and processing infrastructure is fully and properly co-ordinated between his and other Departments, including the Departments for Business,  Energy and Industrial Strategy, for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, for Transport and for International Trade?

Michael Gove: My hon. Friend makes a very important point. Lowestoft is a hugely important port. All the ports in Suffolk and those that serve the North sea are ports in which we wish to invest, because, as he rightly points out, their potential, not just when it comes to increased access to our own fishing waters but new investment in renewables, is growing all the time. Our border strategy, which we published today, has been published in consultation with other Government Departments. He is absolutely right that we need to continue to work with them to take advantage of the opportunities of the future.

Geraint Davies: Happy Christmas, Mr Speaker. We will not be in the single market or the customs union, but the deal on the table offers free trade without tariffs, minimum environmental and worker protection, and sovereignty to diverge for selective adjudicated tariffs if, and only if, we undercut EU standards. Why then, on the last day of Parliament, is the Minister continuing to threaten UK business with no deal, plunging them into immediate tariffs for no divergence in just two weeks’ time?

Michael Gove: Bore da, Mr Speaker, and to the hon. Gentleman. It is the case that the UK Government have been clear about the importance of maintaining sovereignty, the right to diverge and full control over our waters. We shall not be ambiguous about that, but we are determined, if we can, to reach a free trade agreement. Our negotiators are working hard to that end.

Jonathan Gullis: I am sure that you, Mr Speaker, and colleagues across the Chamber are aware that the world’s finest ceramics are made in the potteries of Stoke-on-Trent, and that the ceramics industry, both traditional and advanced ceramics, are integral to the UK’s economy. Will my right hon. Friend confirm that, whether the outcome of the talks with the EU is Canada or Australia, Stoke-on-Trent companies such as Churchill China and Steelite will continue to remain world leaders in manufacturing and production?

Michael Gove: Not just the company my hon. Friend mentions, but Royal Doulton, Wedgwood, Spode and of course more recently Emma Bridgewater. Those are names that are known across the globe. They shine a light on the brilliant ceramics sector that is housed in Stoke-on-Trent and the potteries towns. We will ensure in the future, as we leave the European Union, that across the world people have the chance to dine off and to drink from the first-class products made in his and his neighbours’ constituencies.

Daniel Poulter: Under the coalition Government, great progress was made to improve Government procurement practices. There is still much more that can be done, particularly in the NHS, by taking advantage of national procurement where it does not currently exist. Given the scale of the debt that our country is now in following the covid crisis, will my right hon.  Friend the Minister reassure me that the Government will redouble their efforts to improve Government procurement practices going forward?

Michael Gove: My hon. Friend makes a very important point. May I take this opportunity briefly to thank him for the work he has undertaken as vice-chairman of the all-party group on coronavirus and the work he continues to do on the NHS frontline. He has shown real leadership in the fight against this dreadful virus. He is absolutely right that we need to improve procurement. The procurement Green Paper published earlier this week is a part of that, but I hope to work with him and others on the frontline to ensure that the Department of Health and Social Care does even better in the future.

Carol Monaghan: In his previous response to me, the Minister talked about looking after the nuclear test veterans. Since they have not received compensation for their exposure to ionising radiation, this is frankly laughable. Is not the real reason these veterans have not received their  medal that this would be an admission by the UK Government that they were placed in an extremely hazardous situation?

Johnny Mercer: That is not the real reason at all. This is a very clear process that is rightly outwith the control of Ministers. There is an independent committee that looks at medallic recognition. They have looked at this again and come to the decision that they have. It would be worthwhile funnelling energies into how we look after this special cohort of people. This decision does not diminish their service in any way and, again, I am happy to meet both the hon. Lady and the chairmen of the campaign groups to make sure that we are doing all we can to look after those who have served.

Lindsay Hoyle: Matt Vickers—not here. Oh dear, it is not a good day. Dr Rupa Huq—not here. It is definitely not a good day.

Tom Randall: Yesterday, Emma McClarkin, the chief executive of the British Beer and Pub Association, told the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee of the frustration in her industry at not being privy to data or being involved in the drafting of guidance related to restrictions on hospitality. Seventy million pints were lost in the first lockdown. As brewers and publicans try to understand changing and complex data, will my right hon. Friend consider ways to involve the industry at as early a stage as possible and share as much data as possible so that clear guidance can be issued and the industry can plan ahead?

Michael Gove: May I, first, join you, Mr Speaker, in lamenting the absence of the hon. Member for Ealing Central and Acton (Dr Huq)? I hope that she is well and—[Interruption.] Anyway, we are all rooting for her.

Lindsay Hoyle: Can we root for Matt Vickers as well?

Michael Gove: Well, I do actually. Matt is a great guy.

Lindsay Hoyle: Let us be consistent.

Michael Gove: You are absolutely right. I lament all these absences, but I am even more grateful for the presence of my hon. Friend the Member for Gedling (Tom Randall), who has asked his second question in this session. It is a very good one because he is absolutely right. The increasing and welcome support for the spread of real ale has meant that necessarily, as pubs have closed and moved towards takeaway, we have lost some of that production, and those in the hospitality sector have faced very difficult times. He is absolutely right that we need to work more closely with the hospitality sector to understand the pressures that they face at this very difficult time, and I am grateful to him for raising this issue.

Pauline Latham: Derbyshire is a fantastic place to live and work. It has an all-round economy and great culture. Will the Minister tell us what steps he is taking to increase the proportion of the civil service based outside London and when they will be coming to Derbyshire?

Michael Gove: I can only agree with my hon. Friend: Derbyshire is a great place to live. It rivals Lancashire in the many attractions that it has for people of good taste. Early in the new year, we will be announcing steps that we are taking to move more jobs and more civil service responsibilities out of Whitehall and into locations such as Derbyshire, Lancashire and, of course, Teesside.

Ian Lavery: Listen, Dominic Cummings, the man who single-handedly destroyed the nation’s trust on covid-19, was booted out of No. 10 with a £40,000 pay increase. This is at a time when hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of people have lost their livelihoods, and many more will follow. Millions of other people are facing a real-terms pay freeze. Does the Minister agree that this is totally and utterly immoral—in fact, obscene? And at a time of good will, does he recognise that good old British saying, “What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander”?

Michael Gove: I am very grateful for the point that the hon. Gentleman makes. He is a brilliant campaigner and a doughty fighter. He has been at the frontline of the trade union movement and at the heart of the Labour party for many years. He puts his case very, very well. I respectfully disagree with him on the particular case that he mentions, but I do agree with him on the broader need for us all to recognise the significant sacrifice that the working people across this country  have been making during the covid pandemic, and I thank him for the way in which he has fought for his constituents to ensure that our NHS is there for them. I look forward to working with him outside the to and fro of this Chamber because I know what a great-hearted man he is.

Felicity Buchan: Several businesses in my constituency of Kensington are major importers; I think, for example, of Innocent Drinks, which is a large importer of fruit juice. Clearly such businesses do not want to have to pay tariffs. Will my right hon. Friend assure me that no stone is being left unturned in trying to negotiate a free trade agreement with Europe?

Michael Gove: My hon. Friend makes a very important point. The constituency she represents is home to a variety of innovative businesses, many of which trade successfully with Europe. This is why we are doing everything we can to secure a free trade agreement, but of course it cannot come at any price. I am grateful to her for endorsing Innocent Drinks, although at this time of year I hope we all have the chance to indulge in some not-so-innocent drinks as well.

Zarah Sultana: The Government’s plans to mimic the Republican party’s voter suppression tactics risk denying millions of people the right to vote. Hardest hit will be already marginalised groups such as the Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities. Despite their already being one of the most discriminated against groups in the country, neither the Government’s equalities impact assessment nor the Electoral Commission’s evaluation of voter identification pilots make reference to Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities. Instead of at best ignoring those communities, and at worst demonising them, will the Government scrap plans to create further barriers to their democratic participation?

Julia Lopez: We will continue to work with charities and civil society organisations, including those that represent Traveller and Roma communities, to ensure that voter ID is inclusive of all eligible voters, but we have no plans to scrap it. It is extremely to protect the integrity of our democracy and I fully support it.

Lindsay Hoyle: In order to ensure the safe exit of hon. Members participating in this item of business and the safe arrival of those participating in the next, I am suspending the House for a few minutes.
Sitting suspended.

Business of the House

Valerie Vaz: Will the Leader of the House please give us the forthcoming business?

Jacob Rees-Mogg: The business for the week commencing 4 January will include:
Monday 4 January—The House will not be sitting.
Tuesday 5 January—Remaining stages of the Financial Services Bill.
Wednesday 6 January—Opposition day (14th allotted day). There will be a debate on a motion in the name of the official Opposition. Subject to be announced.
Thursday 7 January—Business to be determined by the Backbench Business Committee.
Friday 8 January—Private Members’ Bills.
Subject to the House’s decision later, we will rise for the Christmas recess at close of business today. Hon. and right hon. Members will recognise that talks with the European Union continue and, should a deal be secured, it is the Government’s intention to request a recall so that Parliament may pass the necessary legislation. Parliament has done and continues to do its duty, and has long shown that it can act quickly and decisively when needed. I am sure that the whole House will agree that the country would expect nothing less.
The Government realise that that duty falls not just on MPs and peers but on the parliamentary staff who make this place function, and to whom we are very grateful. While we may therefore sit again in the coming days, I would like to take this opportunity to thank the staff of the House, civil servants and Members’ assistants for the commitment and dedication they have shown in keeping the parliamentary show going throughout this extremely difficult year. Hon. Members are always grateful for the hard work of the ever-informative Doorkeepers, the cheerful cleaners who have gone about their work regardless of the perception of risk, which was particularly high at the beginning of the pandemic, and the wise Clerks, whose intelligence does not seem to have been affected by the loss of their wigs, which I used to think were essential to keeping their brains warm and up to full speed—

Lindsay Hoyle: I still think they are essential.

Jacob Rees-Mogg: I am glad to note your intervention, Mr Speaker, which has, I hope, been recorded.
We are grateful to the smartly behelmeted police officers, who cheer us with their badinage and keep us safe with their blunderbusses; to the catering staff, who have not lost their appetite for keeping us well nourished; the broadcasting team, who have probably been under more pressure than any other part of our community but have none the less gone about their work quietly and effectively; and the Hansard team, who always correct my errors and smooth away the knots and gnarls of an extempore text.
I hope that all those whose work supports the smooth running of the United Kingdom Parliament feel proud of their contribution in tackling the pandemic this year. I know that should the House be recalled, they will continue their dutiful service to our democracy. For that, Mr Chri—I mean Mr Speaker, not Mr Christmas.  You see, Mr Speaker is a very Father Christmas-like figure, spreading goodness and cheerfulness wherever he goes. For that, Mr Speaker, they deserve the highest praise and a restful Christmas. I can deliver the first, but I fear that I cannot promise the second.

Valerie Vaz: That is a very long business statement. I thank the Leader of the House for the statement and for the Opposition day. I know he is a person of his word and he will not take it away, as he has done previously. It will be Epiphany and he knows that the Opposition will come riding to the rescue of the House and the country with gold, frankincense and myrrh.
Normally we have advance sight of the business statement, but I will not thank the Leader of the House for the advance speculation about when we would rise because that is a ridiculous way to do business. Nick Watt speculated on “Newsnight” on Tuesday about what the Leader of the House would say, when the date has been announced for quite some time.
In his podcast, the Leader of the House said that he wanted to “retrospectively correct” domestic law to recognise the agreement. May I ask him when and why? He went on to say:
“Normally, you would expect a treaty to be ratified before it comes into force”—
yes, that is the legal way—
“but if both sides accept that ratification is done in a different way, that is theoretically possible”.
This is a democracy, not a tutorial. The European Parliament might agree the deal on 28 December. What will happen? What is the legal position if the House does not come back between 31 December and 5 January? Why was this slipped out in a podcast and not said in the House? Despite the Government’s majority, they clearly do not have confidence that the deal will be passed by the House.
Why is the Equalities Minister making statements outside the House about no unconscious bias training and how equalities will change?
The Minister for vaccines has not bothered to come to the House to tell us how many vaccines have been administered. That is so important. Last week, the Health Secretary said he did not know and the Department for Health and Social Care said tens of thousands. Why do we not know? If we can keep track of our parcels, why cannot we keep track of our vaccines? It is important because we need to know whether the Government’s criteria are being applied, and because we have the most deaths in the whole of Europe.
We also have the worst growth. We will hear later in a statement that taxes will be passed on to our constituents—that local authorities will be tasked with raising taxes from our constituents.
I know that the Leader of the House wants to be transparent and accountable. On Tuesday the Minister for the Constitution and Devolution said in a written statement:
“Transparency is a key principle of public procurement. Openness underpins accountability for public money, anti-corruption and the effectiveness of procurement.”—[Official Report, 15 December 2020; Vol. 686, c. 14WS.]
Not for now, but for future pandemics. That is the theory. Will the Leader of House therefore explain why Fleetwood Strategy, run by a person who played a key role in the last election, was given £123,500 for research  into Government communication? We do not need research; we just need the Government to communicate. A former Tory director of communications during the election campaign received £819,000 for focus groups. Will we see the results? What about special advisers—those friends of the Government, or FOGies—getting a 50% pay rise when our teachers, our public service workers and our police officers are not? Worse still, £200,000 of costs for a FOGey who wanted to continue with action against a person he had sacked would pay for six nurses.
The Leader of the House has been assiduous in responding to our questions, particularly on Nazanin and Anousheh. He will know that Ruhollah Zam was an Iranian journalist who was executed. While the Foreign Secretary is on his tour to India, hopefully sorting out our constituents’ relatives—the farmers in India—will he also look at whether Anousheh and Nazanin can come home for Christmas? Of course there is also Luke Symons.
Sadly, I must pay tribute to David O’Nions, who used to work for this House and died in March. His colleagues, friends and family have not had a chance to pay tribute to him. I hope we will get an opportunity to do that.
Finally, I thank you, Mr Speaker, all the Deputy Speakers and all your staff for getting this House together. You set up the taskforce. Marianne Cwynarski was absolutely brilliant in keeping us safe. The Clerk of the House, the Clerk Assistant and everyone in the Table Office have worked continuously to make sure we do our work. John Angeli in the Broadcasting Unit actually got better as we went along. I thank the Serjeant at Arms, Phil Howse and all the Doorkeepers, who also kept us safe, and the Official Reporters. The catering staff kept us fed and watered, and of course, the building has been cleaned so thoroughly. I thank all our Chief Whips on all sides, and the Whips, who have worked really hard—I know it is hard work casting all those 200 proxies—as well as every right hon. and hon. Member, and all their families. I hope they have a peaceful Christmas and a very happy new year.

Jacob Rees-Mogg: If I may continue in the spirit of good will, I thank the right hon. Lady, who is an absolute pleasure to deal with in the way that things have to be dealt with. She is a very important advocate for her own party, but does so with enormous charm. I am not winning her over to conservatism, but it is always a pleasure doing business with her, and indeed with the Scottish National party spokesman, the hon. Member for Edinburgh East (Tommy Sheppard). It is a pleasure working with all the people we work with in the House.
The right hon. Lady paid tribute to David O’Nions—may the souls of all the faithful departed, by the mercy of God, rest in peace, and I hope that he will be commemorated properly. She also raised, quite rightly, the people held illegally. I do write to the Foreign Secretary every week after business questions to ensure this is highlighted, and will do so again. I am very grateful to her for raising these points, because I think it is important that they remain at the forefront of the political debate.
The right hon. Lady made a point about Opposition day. Yes, it is indeed the feast of the Epiphany, and we are hoping—though this may be the triumph of hope  over experience—that we will see some wisdom from the Opposition on that day. It is a hope that has been dashed many times in the past.
The right hon. Lady also asked about how business has been organised. Business has been organised so that the key Bills will receive Royal Assent today: therefore, we have achieved what we needed to achieve, and the one thing outstanding is an unknowable. We have to wait and see whether or not a deal will be achieved, in which case there will be legislative consequences. I am very flattered that she listens to the Moggcast—informative and interesting podcast that it is, done fortnightly through the auspices of ConservativeHome—but that is not a statement of what is going to be going on in the House. It is a discussion about theoretical aspects, and the question that was raised was “Theoretically, could a treaty be ratified ex post facto?” The answer I gave was that this would be legally extremely abnormal and open to challenge, so I am not sure that the right hon. Lady paid as close attention as she ought to have done, although the episode is still available to be downloaded and listened to should she wish to spend Christmas paying closer attention to precisely what I said.
As regards the vaccines Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Stratford-on-Avon (Nadhim Zahawi), he was here in the House a couple of days ago for questions. The Secretary of State for Health and Social Care has been absolutely assiduous in updating the House, and there will be a statement from the relevant Ministry after I have spoken. The right hon. Lady suggested that taxes were going to be going up; I do not know how she knows this, because the Chancellor guards these matters very closely to his own chest in the period before a Budget, so that will be a matter for him. However, the manifesto commitments of the Conservative party were extraordinarily clear in relation to our being the party of low taxation.
Regarding procurement, the procurement had to be done quickly. The right hon. Lady has criticised the communications, but it was absolutely essential to see that the messages were getting across effectively—to see whether they were the messages that worked, that persuaded people to change their behaviour, because it was the most extraordinary level of change in behaviour ever known in this nation. People were not allowed to visit each other’s homes; people were not allowed to go to the shops, or to restaurants. We had to know that the message was getting across effectively, and therefore having a degree of focus group and research into how effective it was seems to me a sensible use of Government—taxpayers’—money.

Jason McCartney: Yesterday, I had the pleasure of an excellent Teams call with the wonderful Sam, Vicki and Lindsay, who are local district nursing students who will be working over Christmas. Tomorrow, I will be out with the friend-to-friend volunteers in my constituency, delivering 80 afternoon cream teas to elderly and vulnerable people in our community. Can my right hon. Friend please join me in thanking all our amazing key workers and volunteers, who will be going the extra mile this festive season to support our wonderful communities?

Jacob Rees-Mogg: I thought my hon. Friend was going to invite me to a cream tea; I feel rather let down. He is absolutely right to highlight the heroic contribution of  all our key workers, and to mention Sam, Lindsay and Vicki and the fact that they will be working over Christmas. Key workers have shown a huge amount of dedication throughout the pandemic; whether they are public servants or essential workers in the private sector, they are the ones who have kept our economy turning under immense pressure. They have shown great dedication to their work and to the nation, be they supermarket staff, cleaners, teachers or bus and train drivers. We should be really proud of the contribution made by the subjects of Her Majesty during this pandemic.

Tommy Sheppard: What a sad and inglorious end for the Brexit adventure: days before the end of transition, we are limping to the finishing line with no idea whether there will be a deal or, if there is, what will be in it. I understand the Government’s intention is to recall Parliament if there is a deal to discuss, but what if the Government fail to get a deal? Are we not to consider the consequences of a hard break in trading with the EU? Have the Government no plans to present to Parliament to mitigate that disaster?
What if there is a deal? When will we see an economic assessment of its provisions? When will the devolved Administrations be consulted on the many areas within their purview? How on earth are hon. Members seriously expected to digest and analyse 1,600 pages of text? Is it not the truth that the Government are preparing to railroad through a grubby little deal, using their majority to avoid scrutiny?
Mr Speaker, this is the season of goodwill, and I wish you, the Leader of the House and all hon. Members a happy Christmas. However, it is also a time to reflect on the big changes of 2020. This is a year in which support for this Government evaporated in England, and in Scotland, this is the year in which the long-standing majority of people who have been opposed to the Tories for 70 years have coalesced around the prospect of independence.
Hon. Members know I like to keep the House updated on Scottish public opinion, and in recent weeks there have been further opinion polls that report a majority for independence. The latest today is in The Scotsman newspaper, which puts yes at 58%. That is the 17th poll in a row recording a majority for Scotland to take control of its own affairs, so I repeat the question I have been asking all year. When will this Parliament have the opportunity to consider changing opinion in Scotland and, if people vote in the coming Scottish general election to review the way Scotland is governed, will this Government respect that vote? Perhaps, since it is Christmas, the Leader of the House might give me an answer this time.

Jacob Rees-Mogg: What a pleasure it is to see that the joy of Christmas has spread to Edinburgh and to have the hon. Gentleman’s joyful, happy countenance shine down upon us once more, wishing us all a merry Christmas, which I heartily reciprocate. I hope he heard me say earlier what a pleasure it was—I mean this genuinely—dealing with him over the course of the year.
The hon. Gentleman mentions the deal that is being done, or not being done, and the need for it to be ratified. He criticises the Government for potentially using their majority to pass any consequent Act of Parliament. I would point out that that is how democracy  works: you get a majority and then you use that majority. It is not particularly shocking—it is what is done in Parliaments across the world. As my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister pointed out, it is going to be a great opportunity for Scotland. He pointed out that Mrs Sturgeon is going to have more fish than she could eat in a lifetime, because we will have control of our fishing waters. Indeed, I think they are going to need to get a bigger boat in Scotland to collect all that essential fish.
The strength of the United Kingdom grows every day. Have we not just heard that Aberdeen City Council wants to separate from Edinburgh, to avoid the machinations and failures of the SNP—the failures in education, the failures in policing and the failures in the health service in Scotland, led by the SNP? What is Aberdeen saying? “Let’s cut out this failed Administration run by the SNP—why don’t we go directly to London to have our settlement done with London?” Is it not fascinating that the failures of the left-wing SNP are making councils in Scotland try to escape from its auspices and authority? The strength of the United Kingdom has provided £8.2 billion to keep the Scottish economy going. Together as one country, one group of taxpayers have helped every part of the country with a depth, a strength, a thoroughness that would not be possible if they were separated.
When the Scottish people had a vote, a real vote, not a gossip with an opinion pollster, and they went to a polling station and put a cross in a box, how did they vote? They voted to remain part of the United Kingdom. We should be proud of that and delighted about it, and we should celebrate. We should have an extra glass at Christmas to celebrate the one United Kingdom.

Sir David Amess: Will my right hon. Friend find time for a debate on the relationship between alcohol and homelessness? Shelter has done some work whereby it found out that two thirds of respondents cite drugs and alcohol as a reason for their being homeless. Southend HARP has done a fantastic job in reducing rough sleeping during the coronavirus pandemic. Particularly as we move towards Christmas, I hope that the Government will continue to work hard on the issue of homelessness. I wish everyone a very happy Christmas and a far better 2021, when I hope Southend will become a city.

Jacob Rees-Mogg: I have been waiting for that last bit, though I might remind my hon. Friend that a jubilee is coming in 2022 and that sometimes is an occasion when more cities are made—but I am not promising anything. To come to his very important point, alcohol and substance abuse have long been associated with homelessness, and I would like to join him in commending the charity Southend HARP for reducing rough sleeping during the pandemic. With Christmas approaching the need to end rough sleeping is thrown into even sharper relief. I commend my right hon. Friend the Communities Secretary for the effort he and his Department have made this year to support the homeless and end rough sleeping. The Government have taken unprecedented action to support the most vulnerable people in our society during the current pandemic, backed by more than £700 million of taxpayers’ money to tackle homelessness and rough sleeping this year alone. On Monday, the rough sleeping Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Rochester and Strood (Kelly Tolhurst),  announced £23 million of funding for this year to provide substance misuse treatment and recovery services for people sleeping rough. That will be backed by additional spending of £52 million in 2021-22.

Ian Mearns: I thank the Leader of the House for the business statement. The Backbench Business Committee will meet this afternoon for the second time this week to determine what will fill the time allocation just given to us for 7 January. Can he confirm that the House will indeed meet in the week beginning 4 January, even if the House is recalled next week? This is important to give Back-Bench Members some certainty before accepting time for debates being offered to them.
I declare an interest, as chair of a primary school governing body here in Gateshead. I gather that this morning the permanent secretary at the Department for Education told the Public Accounts Committee that discussions about the school return in January are still ongoing and Ministers have not communicated a decision yet. Can the Leader of the House arrange for the Education Secretary to come to the House to make a statement to explain what is being proposed, so that before the term ends tomorrow headteachers, their staff, parents and pupils will know what is expected of them in the first week of January?
Mr Speaker, may I wish you, the Leader of the House and the shadow Leader of the House, Members across the House, parliamentary staff and, of course, our excellent Backbench Business Committee staff a very happy, peaceful and restful Christmas, as we look to put 2020 well and truly behind us?

Jacob Rees-Mogg: I hope the Committee meeting this afternoon is a useful and successful one. I am very grateful for the work the Backbench Business Committee does to ensure that this House debates matters that are of the greatest interest to Members. The time has been allocated for the first week back, and that is the week we intend to be back. As regards education, the Government have been absolutely clear about the importance of schools being open and of people going to school to receive their education in person. In some ways it has been like the House of Commons, in that both legislating and education work better when you are physically present.

Tom Randall: Thanks to sound financial management, Conservative-controlled Nottinghamshire County Council plans to set a balanced budget in the next financial year. That rather contrasts with Labour-controlled Nottingham City Council, which is £1 billion in debt, lost nearly £40 million and 200 jobs after its energy firm Robin Hood Energy collapsed, and set up a Christmas market that closed after one day. Its own report said:
“the council recognises the significant shortfalls in its governance and management practice”.
Could we have a debate to explore the many shortcomings of Nottingham City Council, which affect not only residents in the city but those in surrounding areas such as Gedling?

Jacob Rees-Mogg: It is a well-known fact that socialists ultimately run out of other people’s money, which is why I welcome my hon. Friend’s question. It is a delight  to be able to congratulate good and efficient Conservative councils on their sound financial management. He is not the first Member to allude to the hare-brained schemes and insolvent energy companies cooked up by left-wing councils in recent years. It is a great shame that the people of Nottingham have to suffer under such mismanagement. They must look on in envy at their neighbours living in the county council area who enjoy a proper return on their council taxes. Our local authorities, like us in this House, must remember that they serve their electors and their taxpayers, and they should always be clear that they have a duty to manage their finances properly. I hope that their voters take note.

Wendy Chamberlain: Yesterday we heard from all Governments across the UK about the need to revise the Christmas restrictions given the increased risk of spreading coronavirus. Parliament is about to rise, but we are aware that we may be returning before 5 January. I know that Christmas is the season for giving, but I am sure the Leader of the House will agree that we do not want to be giving covid to ourselves, our loved ones and the critical staff we have been thanking here today. If we do return during the Christmas period and in January, will he support testing for MPs and any staff who have to return to the estate?

Jacob Rees-Mogg: The hon. Lady raises an interesting point. That matter has been considered by the Commission, and it will be kept under review. It is a reasonable thing for her to suggest, because this is a covid-secure workplace, and the authorities have worked very hard to ensure that, but we should certainly consider taking further measures that may help. I am sorry that I cannot give her a clearer answer than that it is under consideration.

Lindsay Hoyle: Let us head to the home of Alfred the Great, with Ian Liddell-Grainger.

Ian Liddell-Grainger: Good morning, Mr Speaker.
I am sure that my right hon. Friend will agree that the misuse of public funds is tantamount to theft. Somerset County Council is squandering public money to promote this ghastly nightmare plan for a single unitary authority. The latest lunacy, believe it or not, is a glossy full-page newspaper advert full of lies, but the scandal is that we have to pay for it. The leadership are behaving like Danish Vikings, pillaging the public purse. They have even used money earmarked to fight covid to balance their books. They have no interest in reuniting Somerset. Can we have a debate on greedy thugs wasting money? King Alfred would be appalled. Rudyard Kipling had the answer:
“We never pay any-one Dane-geld,
No matter how trifling the cost;
For the end of that game is oppression and shame,
And the nation that plays it is lost!”
Merry Christmas!

Jacob Rees-Mogg: My hon. Friend is as forthright as ever. We should remember the great contribution to the world from the victory of Alfred the Great, the refusal to give in to the Danes and all that he did when he was in the Somerset levels. My hon. Friend is right to attach great importance to the use of public funds. We all have a duty to ensure that taxpayers’ money is spent well. I  look back to the halcyon days when Somerset County Council was run by Henry Hobhouse, my late godfather, who was a great leader of the council. When he was in charge, things were done properly.

Vicky Foxcroft: Tonight I will join Disability Talk for the results of its poetry competition. Will the Leader of the House join me in congratulating the 126 people who submitted such heartfelt poems? Will he pledge to ensure that Parliament is more accessible for disabled and clinically extremely vulnerable people, which has sadly not been the case during the pandemic? With that in mind, does he have any plans to ensure remote participation during any possible recall of Parliament while we discuss the crucial topic of Brexit? I would love to be able to tell tonight’s winners that Parliament is accessible for all—would the Leader of the House?

Jacob Rees-Mogg: I of course congratulate the 126 people who have entered the poetry competition, and I hope that the hon. Lady will use future business questions to read out selections to the House; I think that would be enjoyed. We had poetry from my hon. Friend the Member for Bridgwater and West Somerset (Mr Liddell-Grainger) and I hope the hon. Lady will follow in his footsteps.
As the hon. Lady knows, I tabled a motion to allow the extremely clinically vulnerable to participate in our debates; unfortunately, it was talked out by Labour Members, with the support of the SNP. That is a matter of considerable regret.

Kieran Mullan: As this may well be the last time that I speak in the Chamber this year, I have reflected on my first 12 months as an MP, and what stands out more than anything is the strength of communities across Crewe and Nantwich. We saw charities, community groups and volunteers respond fantastically to the challenge of coronavirus. I am sure that Members from all parties have seen the same in their constituencies. Will the Leader of the House join me in paying tribute to the so many individuals who have gone above and beyond this year for their neighbours and their communities?

Jacob Rees-Mogg: Yes, I will indeed. My hon. Friend is right to pay tribute to the volunteers in his constituency and the millions of volunteers across the country who have made such an important contribution throughout the pandemic. In my own village of West Harptree, as the restrictions came in in March a note was sent round to every household asking whether people wanted help. It was quite remarkable to see such community spirit. It is a testament to the voluntary spirit and civic mindedness of the British people that hundreds of thousands of Britons volunteered to assist the vulnerable throughout the pandemic. I am sure that that is true in Crewe and Nantwich as well and that my hon. Friend is right to thank his local volunteers.

Zarah Sultana: For the first time ever, UNICEF, the UN agency responsible for providing humanitarian aid to children, is having to feed working-class kids in the UK. While children go hungry, a wealthy few enjoy obscene riches: from Tory donors handed billions in dodgy covid contracts, to people like the Leader of the House, who is reportedly in line to receive an £800,000 dividend pay-out this year.  Will he give Government time to discuss the need to make him and his super-rich chums pay their fair share, so that we can end the grotesque inequality that scars our society?

Lindsay Hoyle: I do not like to personalise too much in the House. I understand that Members want to get things on the record, but I want to show at least some kind of Christmas spirit at the moment.

Jacob Rees-Mogg: It is a real scandal that UNICEF should be playing politics in this way. It is meant to be looking after people in the poorest and most deprived countries in the world, where people are starving and there are famines and civil wars, and it makes cheap political points of this kind, giving £25,000 to one council. It is a political stunt of the lowest order.
What have this Government done about child poverty? We are committed to our manifesto pledge to reduce child poverty. We have expanded free school meals to all five to seven-year-olds, benefiting 1.4 million children. We doubled free childcare for eligible working parents and will establish a £1 billion childcare fund, giving parents the support and freedom to look after children. We are spending £400 million of taxpayers’ money to support children, families and the most vulnerable over winter and through 2021. Between 2010 and 2018-19, there were 100,000 fewer children in absolute poverty in this country. This is a record of success of conservatism and UNICEF should be ashamed of itself.

Jonathan Gullis: Last Christmas, Father Christmas came early for me, as I had the honour of being elected the first ever Conservative Member of Parliament for Stoke-on-Trent North, Kidsgrove and Talke. Twelve months on, I am proud that, while tackling a global health pandemic, we continue to level up, with up to £29 million for rail and bus services in Stoke-on-Trent and £25 million for the Kidsgrove town deal, of which £300,000 has so far gone towards the start of refurbishing and reopening Kidsgrove sports centre. Does my right hon. Friend agree that the people’s Government were given a resounding mandate to deliver their manifesto, and whatever challenges we face as a nation, we must honour the promise that we made to the electorate?

Jacob Rees-Mogg: First, I congratulate my hon. Friend on his excellent first year in the House and on putting his constituency on the map—it took a Conservative Member to put it on the map. I welcome the Government’s commitments to Stoke; it is clear that we are delivering on the promises made to its voters, and we will continue to do so throughout this Parliament. My hon. Friend raises a crucial point: the 2019 manifesto is the foundation of this Government. It is a bond with our voters and it is incumbent on all Ministers to make sure that is honoured—and we are doing so. From the towns fund to the thousands of new police officers and nurses, a landmark new immigration system, safeguarding the United Kingdom’s internal market and, of course, delivering Brexit, we are keeping and will continue to keep our promises as we level up and improve the opportunities for everyone across this country.

Matt Western: Despite its being the largest infrastructure project in Europe, we seem to lack any debate on the HS2 programme. That is  despite it costing a huge amount of public money and despite the fact that the pandemic has changed the way that people will be using rail in the future. The only debate on the matter seems to be in the other place. Earlier this week, a report from the independent National Infrastructure Commission, chaired by Lord Armitt, provided an assessment of rail needs for the midlands and the north. It emphasised greater investment in the north specifically and in regional lines. Given the rumours that the eastern leg of HS2 has been cancelled as part of the HS2 project, can we have an urgent debate about the future and viability of the project?

Jacob Rees-Mogg: The HS2 Bill is in their lordships’ House, so, understandably, that is why the Lords are paying particular attention to it. The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right to ask for a debate on such an important infrastructure project. It is an enormous amount of taxpayers’ money that is being spent. I cannot promise him a debate in Government time, but I imagine that there is widespread interest across the House on this subject and I would have thought that an application to the Backbench Business Committee would be in order.

Julian Lewis: One level playing field on which we might all agree is the similar treatment of similar businesses in terms of Government support during the covid emergency, so may we have a statement in the new year, if not sooner, about the plight of food and drink wholesalers who do not get business rates relief, whereas supermarkets do? That seems to me and many others to be inequitable.

Jacob Rees-Mogg: My right hon. Friend has raised this point with me before, and it is one that I completely understand and have a degree of sympathy with, though there is a difference with wholesalers between the retailers, and some of them have managed to change their supply customers quite effectively. They also benefit from the other schemes—the furlough scheme, bounce back loans and many other schemes—that the Government have introduced. Although he is right to raise the point, there are things that the Government have done to help that sector.

Bill Esterson: The Leader of the House did not answer the question earlier about what the permanent secretary at the Department for Education said this morning. In case he has missed it, I will read it out to him. She said:
“There are conversations going on about exactly how parents and pupils will go back at the beginning of January, but I am afraid I cannot speak to the Committee about that this morning.”
Parents, children and school staff all need to know now what the arrangements are, so can the Education Secretary give a statement to MPs in the House today to clear up this latest confusion and mess?

Jacob Rees-Mogg: I disagree with the hon. Gentleman: I did answer the question earlier. The Government’s policy is that it is important for people to be educated physically and to be back at school. That remains Government policy and has not changed.

Robin Millar: Reflecting on the past 12 months, it occurs to me that many of the difficulties faced by residents and businesses in Aberconwy  are actually reflections of some of the biggest questions that any Government can face. Right now we are looking at when consent by Government reverts to Government by consent. We are wrestling even this morning with questions about the UK’s place in the world, and we have heard from my right hon. Friend that there are tensions and questions to be asked about the relationship between different layers of Government in the Union, so will my right hon. Friend consider giving some time in the new year to a general debate on the limits of government?

Jacob Rees-Mogg: In the 18th century, there was a debate which I think was called “The powers of the Crown have increased, are increasing and should be reduced”. It is commonplace in this House that we should always jealously guard the powers of this House against the Executive. It is in the nature of Government to want power, and it is in the nature of a legislature to ensure that that power is proportionate. My hon. Friend makes an extremely good point, though I would say one thing, which is that all that has happened in relation to the pandemic has continued to be Government by consent. It is both remarkable and reassuring how in this country, unlike many others, the need for zealous enforcement has been remarkably low, because we are a country that is governed by consent, and people have complied with the restrictions by their own consent rather than by compulsion.

Marion Fellows: For many of the most vulnerable folk in Motherwell and Wishaw, and across the UK, their Post Office card account is their main access to cash. In this Schrödinger’s Parliament, I must ask for a Government statement on the managed decline of services provided through post offices, as, if I ask for a debate in Government time, I am unable to take part. Will the Leader of the House fulfil my Christmas wish and allow me, and so many others, to take part in vital debates like this virtually in 2021?

Jacob Rees-Mogg: I am very grateful to the hon. Lady for her question. She has of course made the point about Post Office cards in business questions. I reiterate that I brought forward a motion that would have allowed the extremely clinically vulnerable to participate remotely, and it is deeply unfortunate that it was talked out by the Labour party in cahoots with the SNP.

Robert Halfon: May I take this opportunity, Mr Speaker, to wish you and your staff a very merry Christmas and new year—and, in particular, the broadcasters and my Committee staff? I thank them for all they have done to keep Parliament working for those online.
On Saturday, our Education Committee will publish a report on adult skills and lifelong learning. Nine million working-age adults in England have low literacy or numeracy skills, or both, and 6 million adults are not qualified to level 2—equivalent to GCSE level. Following the publication of the Committee’s report, can we have an urgent debate on our plan for a revolution in adult skills and lifelong learning?

Jacob Rees-Mogg: Those figures are absolutely shocking—that 9 million working-age adults in England have low literacy or numeracy. I therefore very much welcome the  work that my right hon. Friend and his Committee have been doing. Investment in skills is vital to giving people the opportunity to improve their skills, and to change their skills, to advance into higher-wage employment, and to support adults who will need to retrain at different points throughout their lives. Starting next year, the Government are spending £2.5 billion of taxpayers’ money—£3 billion when including Barnett consequentials—on the national skills fund. This is a significant amount of money that has the potential to deliver new opportunities to generations of adults who may previously have been left behind. From April 2021, we will be supporting any adult aged 24 and over who wants to achieve their first full level 3 qualification—broadly equivalent to two A-levels—or a technical certificate or diploma, with access to nearly 400 fully funded courses. This will be the key in reducing that 9 million number.

Chris Elmore: I know the Leader of the House will be as concerned as I am about the increasing numbers of people who deem themselves to be vaccine-hesitant. Only today, The Times says that there has been a 4% increase in the number of people in the UK saying that they are concerned about taking the vaccine. I have raised many times with him, with the Health Secretary and with the Cabinet Office the need for a Government programme on key messaging to tell people that the vaccine is safe, as I know he agrees it is. Could he arrange for one of the Departments of State to make a statement on what the plan is to tackle the anti-vaxxers to ensure that people who are concerned about vaccines get their questions answered and are not exploited for the profits of anti-vaxxers?

Jacob Rees-Mogg: The hon. Gentleman raises a point of the greatest importance. We have to win the argument and reassure people that the vaccine is safe. Part of that will be leading by example. I am absolutely delighted—I cannot tell you how pleased I am—that my mother is getting the vaccine on Saturday. For those of us who have older parents, it is a real reassurance that they are going to be vaccinated. But it also shows that I, at least, am genuinely confident, because I would not be encouraging my mother to have the vaccine if I did not think it was completely safe. We also, less anecdotally, need to look at the statistics, the risks and the reports. The risks are tiny and the benefits are overwhelming, both to the individual and to society at large. The hon. Gentleman makes a really important point. We have a great job to do, all of us, in leading the way and making the argument about why vaccines are safe, not a risk, and how they open up the possibility of life getting back to normal.

Martin Vickers: Earlier this week, the Government published their energy White Paper, whose policies are crucial to my constituency. As my right hon. Friend knows, we have major facilities for serving the offshore renewable sector. Page 57 of the White Paper specifically refers to the revival of the port of Grimsby, part of which falls in my constituency. The Secretary of State made a statement earlier this week, but because of the importance of the policies in the White Paper, could the Leader of the House find time for a full-scale debate on this?

Jacob Rees-Mogg: Thanks to my hon. Friend’s efficient campaigning, I think all Government policy is now devoted to improving the opportunities in Cleethorpes,  and that is only right. I am glad to say that our plans to build back greener see an increased ambition of 40 GW of energy from offshore wind by 2030 and a new target for floating offshore wind to deliver 1 GW of energy by 2030, supporting up to 60,000 jobs. The location of the port of Grimsby close to the majority of the UK’s offshore wind farm developments presents a major opportunity for the port and the town, with around £10 million going to be invested. The port is now recognised as the centre for operations and maintenance services for the offshore wind farms, and I hope that my hon. Friend will soon be able to see the fruits of these efforts. The people of Cleethorpes and Grimsby should be so pleased that they have such a strong advocate in this House who always ensures that Cleethorpes and Grimsby are at the forefront of Her Majesty’s Government’s mind.

Rachael Maskell: A happy Christmas to you and all your staff, Mr Speaker, as well as to my constituents in York Central. Many of my constituents and businesses are incredibly worried. Six deadlines have passed, with the final one in just two weeks’ time, and we still do not know the contents of this possible deal. In the light of that, does the Leader of the House not agree that it would be a contempt of this Parliament and our constituents if someone from the Cabinet did not come to the House to make an urgent statement before the close of business today to say exactly what point the talks are at and what the contents of the talks are, so that my constituents can start planning for their futures in just two weeks’ time?

Jacob Rees-Mogg: We have just had Cabinet Office questions, when there would have been an opportunity to raise questions about this, but the negotiations are, as everybody knows, not yet finalised. When they are finalised, that will be the right time to make a statement. It is also worth bearing in mind that there will be changes regardless of whether there is a free trade agreement between the UK and the European Union, and businesses should be getting ready for those changes irrespective of whether anything is agreed in the next few days.

Jo Gideon: This year, pressure on local mental health services has increased tenfold, with covid-19 bringing local challenges and new challenges. Having raised this issue with the Government on numerous occasions, I was delighted to welcome a record £15 million for mental health services in Stoke-on-Trent, which will allow Harplands Hospital in my constituency to benefit from a new crisis care centre and detoxification suite. Will the Leader of the House make parliamentary time available to discuss investment in local health services in communities across the UK, following the unprecedented impact of covid-19?

Jacob Rees-Mogg: My hon. Friend is right to raise this issue, and I am glad that mental health services in her constituency are being fully supported. It is vital that we do not forget the impact that this pandemic has had on people’s mental health. Overall mental health funding increased to £13.3 billion in 2019-20. The Government have provided £10.2 million of additional funding for mental health charities during this crisis, including £1 million donated to charities across the country, inspired by ITV’s “Help our Helplines” campaign. I am aware that  the subject was debated in Westminster Hall on 8 October. My hon. Friend may wish to apply for an Adjournment debate or Westminster Hall debate in the usual way, but this is of fundamental importance and it is at the forefront of the Government’s thinking.

Hywel Williams: The ports infrastructure funding announced yesterday distributes £194 million. Rightly or wrongly, our Welsh ports are getting just £2.25 million, and Holyhead, the second busiest roll-on roll-off port in the UK, gets less than £0.25 million. Given this experience, may we have an early statement on having fair, sensible and readily understandable principles behind investing public money under the Government’s forthcoming shared prosperity fund?

Jacob Rees-Mogg: Obviously all spending of Government money has to be scrutinised extremely carefully. The ports fund is there to help ports across the country to improve their capacity and flow. It will be allocated in a way that is fair to all the ports involved. I know the hon. Gentleman is a great campaigner for his local port, and if he wanted to raise the matter in an Adjournment debate, I think that would be a suitable next step.

Nigel Mills: It is apparent from the Leader of the House’s announcement of the business that if we do get a deal with the EU, there will be very little time for this House to consider it. Will he at least ensure that the Select Committee established to scrutinise the future relationship with the EU can scrutinise that deal and report to the House?

Jacob Rees-Mogg: I know what the question was, because my hon. Friend spoke to me about it yesterday, which is an advantage, given the weakness of the connection just then. I am aware of his concerns about the Committee on the Future Relationship with the European Union winding up in early January, but there is of course also the European Scrutiny Committee. It might be a very good step if the two Chairmen discussed with each other the issues that came out of any agreement that may be made. As there is a Committee, it may well be able to learn from the right hon. Member for Leeds Central (Hilary Benn). The Chairman of the future relationship Committee and my hon. Friend the Member for Stone (Sir William Cash) may have a lot of shared interests that they can exchange with each other.

Geraint Davies: Yesterday, an inquest found that air pollution was the cause of death for nine-year-old Ella Kissi-Debrah, who lived just 30 yards from the busy London south circular and was admitted to hospital 30 times in three years for air pollution-induced asthma attacks before she ultimately died. Therefore, for Ella’s sake and in the light of this verdict, will the Leader of the House urge the Government to ensure that legally binding World Health Organisation air quality limits are not just included in the Environment Bill but are enforced from 2021 and not delayed, so that tens of thousands more children are not put at unnecessary risk, but have the protection of the law? It could be called Ella’s law, following her tragic death and this historic verdict.

Jacob Rees-Mogg: I know that the thoughts of the House remain with Ella’s family and friends, and I think it is best if I reiterate what my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister said yesterday. Our understanding of the major public health risk posed by air pollution has improved significantly over recent years, and we are always working to raise awareness among the public and health professionals. Air quality has improved significantly over recent decades. We are continuing to take urgent action to curb the effect of air pollution on communities across England through our ambitious clean air strategy and landmark Environment Bill and the delivery of our £3.8 billion plan to clean-up transport and tackle nitrogen dioxide pollution. We are going further in protecting communities from air pollution—in particular, fine particulate air pollution, which we know is particularly harmful to people’s health—through our landmark Environment Bill, where we are setting ambitious new air quality targets with the prime focus on reducing public health impacts. I will add that one of the great scandals of modern politics was the encouragement of diesel engines with the particulate and nitrous oxide emissions that they were giving out, which I am afraid is a scandal that long predates this Government.

Fiona Bruce: The excellent Children’s Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Chelmsford (Vicky Ford), has spoken of a
“family-shaped gap at the heart of national policy”,
so will the Leader of the House rejoice with me at the good news that the Government are to fund a new national centre for family hubs to support local communities across the country to set up a family hub locally? Will he encourage every Member of Parliament to find out more from the Family Hubs Network about how they can champion a family hub in their constituency, perhaps by holding family hubs fairs, to help close that family-shaped gap in their area?

Jacob Rees-Mogg: My hon. Friend, as so often, is absolutely right. I do indeed rejoice that family is being put at the centre of public life. The Department for Education has announced it will be launching a procurement for a national centre for family hubs, whose role would be to champion family hubs and to work with councils to develop and spread best practice, and an evaluation innovation fund to build the evidence base on integrated family service models. I think my hon. Friend’s idea that we should all go out and have family hubs and support family hubs is a very good one. I do my bit: I have got six children, so my support for the family is unstinting.

Florence Eshalomi: Mr Speaker, may I take this opportunity to wish you and the House staff a merry Christmas? For a number of my constituents, this Christmas will not be a merry one, because they are living in properties that still have unsafe cladding. They are having to face enormous costs because of the waking watch. They will not have a good Christmas, so can we please, in 2021, have an urgent debate on this really important issue in the House?

Jacob Rees-Mogg: The hon. Lady raises a point that the Government have been tackling. We have brought forward the most significant building safety reforms in nearly 40 years. We are providing £1.6 billion to speed up the removal of unsafe cladding, making homes safer sooner.  Almost 80% of buildings with dangerous Grenfell-style cladding have had it removed or are in the process of doing so, and that rises to 97% in the social housing sector. More than 100 buildings have started remediation on site in 2020 so far, despite the backdrop of the global pandemic, and that is more than in the whole of 2019. We are clear that works to remove unsafe ACM cladding must be completed by the end of 2021. I hope this will be some reassurance to the hon. Lady’s constituents.

Selaine Saxby: Can my right hon. Friend confirm that, as the roll-out of the vaccine progresses, he will make Government time available to ensure that Members of this House are able to monitor and scrutinise the process and ensure that it is effectively reaching all of our constituencies?

Jacob Rees-Mogg: My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care has gone to great lengths to keep this House updated throughout the pandemic, and there will be a statement later from the Department on the latest state of affairs, when these issues can be raised. It is worth saying that, last week, we took a huge step forward in our collective fight against coronavirus, rolling out an initial 800,000 doses of the approved Pfizer vaccine, which is a considerable achievement. We have done remarkably well against our European friends. I notice that the Germans are getting a little bit antsy because we are ahead of them, and that is because we have a very efficient regulator.

Catherine McKinnell: We are seeing the emergence of a very worrying pattern of sports and leisure facilities in areas with the biggest pre-existing health inequalities also being at the greatest risk of closure due to the impact of covid. In Newcastle upon Tyne North, we are very concerned about the future of West Denton pool, which closed when lockdown first began in March and has not yet reopened. It is vital that those living in the outer west of Newcastle can fulfil their new year health resolutions and that their children can learn to swim, like anywhere else. Can we have a debate in Government time on how we prevent this pandemic from deepening pre-existing health inequalities and ensure that facilities such as West Denton pool can reopen once again and become a hive in our community?

Jacob Rees-Mogg: The Government have provided enormous funds to local authorities that help them to pay for the services they ought to be providing, including £4.6 billion across the country of funding that is not ring-fenced, which local councils can use as they see fit. I encourage the hon. Lady to lobby her local council to try to ensure these facilities are available.

Robert Largan: Can we have a debate on the way we can use nature-based solutions to tackle climate change? I want to highlight the efforts to restore the Peak district’s beautiful moorlands. Raising the water table by restoring peat bogs has many benefits. It increases carbon capture to tackle climate change, it reduces the risk of fire and flooding, it improves water quality and it also enhances biodiversity. It really is a no-brainer, and I am proud to have helped secure a significant increase in funding for these vital local projects.

Jacob Rees-Mogg: My hon. Friend raises an important point. Indeed, we know that better management of our peatlands can improve biodiversity, carbon storage and  flood protection. We have always been clear about the need to phase out rotational burning of protected blanket bog, and we are looking at how legislation could achieve this. We have already allocated £10 million over the last three financial years that will restore over 16,000 acres of peatland. We have committed to restoring a further 85,000 acres of peatland as part of the new £640 million nature for climate fund, announced by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor during the most recent Budget. Later this year, we will be publishing an England peat strategy to manage, protect and restore our peatlands so that they deliver benefits for climate and for nature.

Patrick Grady: I echo all the thanks and good wishes to everyone who has kept us safe this year.
I am increasingly concerned about how the Leader of the House defines and understands the parliamentary sovereignty for which he has campaigned for so long. He knows, first of all, that if a motion like the one on virtual participation gets talked out, that means the House wants more time to discuss it, and as Leader of the House, he should be providing that time. Now, it seems that he wants to bring us back on a recall to bounce through the biggest decision about our future relationship with Europe, which will define that relationship for decades to come. And this morning, he has issued guidance about how Members of Parliament should travel safely under the covid restrictions, precisely because he recognises the risks that must be associated with it. The solution to all this is, like the Christmas lights on a tree, to switch back on the remote participation that we were able to use earlier in the year.

Jacob Rees-Mogg: The hon. Gentleman asks for things to be switched back on, but we have to be here to do our job properly. It seems to me that under any definition, parliamentary sovereignty is not when members of his flock wander up to the Table, lift up the Mace and prance about the Chamber with it because they are a bit crotchety. That was one of the most ridiculous sights in this House in recent years. I thought that on behalf of the SNP, the hon. Gentleman, who is a fine parliamentarian, was going to stand up and apologise for that really silly, childish, babyish display yesterday, rather than complaining that we are going to have to do our job and our duty and come in and vote on important matters of public business.

Nicholas Fletcher: Individuals are being listed as covid fatalities if they die within 28 days of testing positive, even when the main reason for their passing was another long-term health condition. That is totally wrong, for two reasons. First, on a national level, it is skewing our fatality figures, providing inaccurate data upon which decisions are based. Secondly, it means that families of deceased former mineworkers are receiving inaccurate post-mortems and therefore missing out on the compensation that is owed to them. This is causing considerable hardship and distress to those families. Will the Leader of the House arrange for a Minister to come to the House to make a statement after our return in January?

Jacob Rees-Mogg: The second point that my hon. Friend raises is of the utmost importance. In a constituency such as his—and indeed my own, where there is a former mining community—this must be a matter of the greatest local concern. I assure him that I will pass  this matter on to my right hon. Friend the Health Secretary immediately after these proceedings, because my hon. Friend has raised a fundamentally important point and he is right to seek redress of grievance.

Lindsay Hoyle: Let us head over to Wales with Kevin Brennan. Can I just say that there is a dress code for Members who are not in the Chamber as well as those who are?

Kevin Brennan: I thank the shadow Leader of the House for mentioning Luke Symons, who is still being held captive by the Houthis in Yemen. May I press the Leader of the House to ensure that his colleagues in the Foreign Office are doing all they can to secure his release?
My constituent Bailey Williams turns 19 this week. He suffers from multiple seizures, except when controlled by medical cannabis. He can get hold of his medicine, but many children and young people in that position cannot, because the Department of Health and Social Care has confirmed that after 31 December it will be impossible to import that important medicine from the Netherlands. May we have an urgent statement from the Department of Health and Social Care, in writing if necessary, to indicate what it thinks families who are faced with the prospect of their children losing their vital medicine should do?

Jacob Rees-Mogg: I will indeed take up the case of Luke Symons with my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary after business questions, as I do every week.
The Government obviously sympathise with those families dealing so courageously with challenging conditions, particularly in their children. Two licensed cannabis-based medicines have been made available for prescription on the NHS, following clearly demonstrated evidence of their safety and their clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, which is rightly independent of Government, has said that there is a clear need for more evidence to support routine prescribing and funding for unlicensed cannabis-based products. As regards the supply of drugs into this country, a great deal of planning has been done to ensure that that supply will not be disrupted.

Shaun Bailey: We all know that the true way we can level up is through education, so I was horrified to read in the press recently that, in my borough of Sandwell, attendance rates of 37% had been recorded in some instances. I have some of the areas with the highest rates of child poverty in the west midlands. May we have a debate in Government time about how we can ensure that our children can get into school and stay in school and that we support education, particularly in areas such as Wednesbury, Oldbury and Tipton that suffer from some of the highest rates of child deprivation?

Jacob Rees-Mogg: My hon. Friend raises a really serious point. It is vital to their educational progress, wellbeing and wider development that children and young people attend school. It is appalling to hear about the attendance record at schools in his constituency—37% is an atrociously low figure. We must do all we can to reverse this, so that children in West Bromwich can take advantage of the opportunities available to them. Approximately 99% of schools have been open each week since the start of the term, and it is important that schools continue to remain open, despite the restrictions brought about by the pandemic. I shall pass on my hon. Friend’s concerns to the Secretary of State for Education, but it is primarily a local authority matter.

Jim Shannon: The Leader of the House, you, Mr Speaker, and other right hon. and hon. Members know that Christmas is very much a family time, but I wish to highlight a place where that will not happen. Will the Leader of the House ask the Foreign Secretary to update the House at the earliest opportunity about the urgent situation in Nigeria, in particular the kidnapping on 12 December of more than 300 schoolboys in the north-west state of Katsina and what specifically Her Majesty’s Government are doing to support efforts to secure their safe release? I would be grateful if we could get them home for Christmas, but we had better get them home some time in the new year.

Jacob Rees-Mogg: May I begin by wishing the hon. Gentleman a very happy Christmas? I have a feeling that he is the only Member of this House who is disappointed that I have announced the recess dates, and would prefer that we were sitting on Christmas Day itself, which would be the best way he could celebrate. [Interruption.] Well of course one goes to church first and then comes into the House. I do wish him and all his family a very happy Christmas.
The hon. Gentleman has raised a deeply concerning subject—the reports of armed men attacking a secondary school in Katsina in north-west Nigeria and abducting over 300 children. Violence against children studying in school is a despicable act. To go back to an earlier question, one does wonder whether UNICEF might think a bit more about this than faffing around in England. The Minister for Africa tweeted on 14 December expressing our concern, and we are monitoring the situation closely. The UK is providing—this is important—a comprehensive package of support to Nigeria to help tackle insecurity challenges, including serious and organised crime and terrorism, but there is clearly a great deal more to do. Over Christmas, both the hon. Gentleman and I will remember those children in our prayers.

Lindsay Hoyle: In order to allow the safe exit of hon. Members participating in this item of business and the safe arrival of those participating in the next, I am suspending the House for three minutes.
Sitting suspended.

Covid-19 Update

Matthew Hancock: As we enter the coldest months, we must be vigilant and keep this virus under control. Yesterday, 25,161 cases were reported and there are 18,038 people in hospital with coronavirus in the UK. We must keep supressing this virus. This is not just a matter for the Government or this House; it is a matter for every single person. These are always the most difficult months for people’s health and for the NHS. Especially with the vaccine already here, we must be cautious as we accelerate the vaccine deployment as per the winter plan. We have come so far—we must not blow it now.
When we reintroduced the tiered system, we resolved to review the data in each area every two weeks. The sophisticated covid surveillance system we now have in place means we can act swiftly and decisively when needed. At the weekend, we held an emergency review for London, Essex and parts of Hertfordshire where cases are accelerating fast. Yesterday, we held the first full formal review. I must report to the House that across the world cases are rising once more. In Europe, restrictions are being reintroduced. In America, case rates have accelerated. In Japan, cases are rising once again. Yesterday, the Welsh Government made the decision to tighten restrictions across the whole of Wales. No one wants tougher restrictions any longer than necessary, but where they are necessary, we must put them in place to prevent the NHS from being overwhelmed and to protect life. Even in a normal year, this is the busiest time for the NHS. As Chris Hobson, chief executive of NHS Providers, reminded us this morning:
“controlling infection rates is about limiting patient harm”.
This is a moment when we act with caution.
In the south-east of England, cases are up 46% in the last week. Hospital admissions are up by more than a third. In the east of England, cases are up two thirds in the last week and hospital admissions are up by nearly half. It is therefore necessary to apply tier 3 measures across a much wider area of the east and south-east of England, including: Bedfordshire; Buckinghamshire; Berkshire; Peterborough; the whole of Hertfordshire; Surrey with the exception of Waverley; Hastings and Rother, on the Kent border of East Sussex; and Portsmouth, Gosport and Havant in Hampshire. These changes will take effect from one minute past midnight on Saturday morning.
I know that tier 3 measures are tough, but the best way for everyone to get out of them is to pull together and not just follow the rules but do everything they possibly can to stop the spread of the virus. Where we have seen places get the virus under control and come out of tier 3, it is because everybody has taken responsibility on themselves to make that happen. We have seen case rates fall across large parts of England. I know that many places in tier 3 have seen their rates reduce. In most places, I have to tell you, Mr Speaker, we are not quite there yet and the pressures on the NHS remain.
However, we are able to move some place down a tier. We assess these decisions according to the five published indicators: case rates; case rates among the over-60s; test positivity; rates of change; and hospital pressure. Today, I am placing in the House of Commons Library  an assessment of each area and publishing the data on which we make these decisions. For the vast majority of places currently in tier 3, we are not making a change today. However, I am pleased to say that some places can go down a tier. In Bristol and north Somerset, rates have come down from 432 per 100,000 to 121 and falling. I can therefore announce that Bristol and north Somerset will come out of tier 3, and into tier 2 on Saturday. Rates in Herefordshire have also come down, to 45 in 100,000, and are falling, and we can therefore bring Herefordshire out of tier 2 and into tier 1.
I want to pay tribute to everyone who has been doing the right thing and getting rates down. Whether or not your area has come down a tier today, it is so vital that everyone sticks at it and does the right thing, especially over this Christmas period. It is important to remember that this can be a silent disease. One in three people with the disease have no symptoms but can still pass it on. Everyone therefore has a personal responsibility to play their part in keeping this pandemic under control. I know that other areas are so eager to move down the tiers, and the best thing we can all do is act with responsibility to get the virus under control.
These restrictions are, thankfully, not the only tool we have now to fight this disease: we are further expanding our testing programme, and later today the Education Secretary will set out further action on school testing in the new year; and, of course, the vaccine roll-out is accelerating. I can update the House by saying that over 200 vaccination sites are now open, in all parts of the UK, with more opening their doors and bringing hope to communities over the coming days. I know that everyone will be as thrilled as I am every time they are contacted by a friend or loved one who has been getting the jab. It was a wonderful sight to see the global map of vaccine deployment, with the UK proudly standing out as the site of the first vaccinations. It is a huge logistical challenge but the vaccine offers us promise of a better year ahead. Until the great endeavour of vaccine deployment reaches enough people to make this country safe, we must keep doing what it takes to protect our NHS and protect those we love. That means all of us doing our bit, following the rules and taking personal responsibility to help contain the spread of the virus, so that we can get through this safely, together. I commend this statement to the House.

Jon Ashworth: I thank the Secretary of State for advance sight of his statement. These past 12 months have seen covid spread with speed and severity. More than 65,000 people have died in the United Kingdom, at least 620 of them health and care workers making the ultimate sacrifice in the line of duty. More than 240,000 people have been treated in hospital with the disease and, as he reminded us, what gives this virus such lethal advantage is that people who appear healthy can go about their lives unaware that they are transmitting the virus to others. So, of course, we accept and understand why he has had to move areas into higher tiers today, even though this means tens of millions of people across England are now living under the toughest restrictions, and we are grateful that he is placing in the Library details on each of our local authority areas.
However, two weeks ago the Secretary of State did say that we have the virus “under control” and that:
“We can't risk letting cases rise again, especially into Christmas”.
I am afraid that that is exactly what is now happening, is it not? Yesterday, England reported more than 23,000 cases, which is the highest number in a month. Hospital admissions on 14 December were the highest since 16 April, and the number of people in hospital with covid is now at its highest since 22 April. The number has risen by 20% since the end of lockdown. If it goes up by another 20%, we are back at the same peak we saw in April. These numbers should be sounding all the alarm bells there are, which is why clinicians are pleading with the Secretary of State to put robust arrangements in place to keep people safe through Christmas. We saw in Canada and in the United States huge spikes in infections following Thanksgiving. This is not about cancelling Christmas; Santa will still deliver his presents. But is the Secretary of State really telling us that allowing indoor mixing of three households across regions and generations for five days is sensible, given that the virus is raging with such ferocity at the moment? The devastating tragedy is that those who will be most impacted by the virus spreading through the easing are those who will be at the front of the queue for the vaccine in the next month or two. So will he look again at the Christmas arrangements?
On vaccination, more than 130,000 have been vaccinated in the first week—that is a good thing, and we celebrate it and congratulate all involved—but to vaccinate every older person, vulnerable person and key worker by Easter, we will need to do something like double that every day. The National Audit Office this week said that £11.7 billion for the programme will be needed alongside 46,000 extra staff, so how much is allocated to the vaccine programme at the moment? How many staff are being taken on and trained to support the vaccination programme? When will we see the mass vaccination centres opened in our constituencies?
There have also been warnings today about the vaccine roll-out in primary care taking longer than planned, because existing software systems keep crashing, the system does not alert GPs if a patient on their lists has already had it in hospital, and GPs are forced to turn to pen and paper for data capture. When will there be a national call and recall system for GPs, and why was it not ready for the roll-out this week?
The right hon. Gentleman mentioned that the Secretary of State for Education is to make a statement on schools. I do not know whether that means he is coming to the House or not, but with schools going back in January, can he provide some clarity around testing in schools? There is some speculation that the opening of schools will be delayed by a week in January. Can he give us an update on what is happening on that front?
Finally, this has been a dismal year for all of us, but our national health service workers and our care workers have, as always, done us proud, so I put on record my thanks to all of them, many of whom will be working through the Christmas and new year period. I also thank all those working on the response to covid, including the right hon. Gentleman’s departmental officials, our medical science community and our public health teams. With that, I wish you, Madam Deputy Speaker, all working in the House and, indeed, the Secretary of State a safe Christmas and a happy new year.

Matthew Hancock: The hon. Gentleman rightly asked about the arrangements in place for Christmas, which the Prime Minister set out yesterday very clearly. Christmas is a very special time of year and that is why we have put in the arrangements that we have. It is a matter of people’s personal responsibility to ensure that they act and see their loved ones in a way that is safe and careful. I think people understand that and, what is more, I think people will abide by it. We know that it is safer to see older people, especially if they are over 70 or clinically extremely vulnerable, if we have taken the care to reduce social contact beforehand. We also know that, after Christmas, being able to reduce social contact will be important for keeping this under control.
I think that aspect of personal responsibility is important. Sometimes in this House it feels to me that the debate is as though, if we do not, in Government, put in place concrete rules, nobody will take any action. Actually, it is down to individuals—each and every one of us—to take responsibility for our actions, within the rules, of course, but also being cautious. This is a massive team effort and my experience of the last few months is that when a community has come together to get case rates down, that is when it has happened and when it has worked. Even with the rules in place, it is only when the community essentially comes together to get this under control that we get cases coming down along with the pressure on the NHS. I regret having to take the action that we have to take. I deem it necessary, and there is a strong view right across Government that these actions are necessary, but I also plead that personal responsibility is absolutely central to how we as a society should respond to this pandemic.
The hon. Gentleman asked about the mass vaccination roll-out. The mass vaccination sites are appropriate for the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine, should that come through and be approved by the regulator, so it is some weeks until we will see those rolled out. However, we are every day having more and more primary care sites coming on board with the roll-out of the Pfizer vaccine, and it is very good to see that happening. I expect the numbers that are vaccinated to accelerate. The team have made a very good start and there is a long way further to go.
The hon. Gentleman asked about the data systems. They have largely been working very effectively. Of course, any very large logistical roll-out like this has niggles, but they are small and have been brilliantly dealt with locally on the ground.
The hon. Gentleman asked about the roll-out of testing in schools. As I say, the Education Secretary will set out more details on offering all secondary schools, colleges, special schools and alternative provision settings the help, support and facilities to test as many secondary-age and further education students as possible, as they resume their education in January. I thank in advance all the teachers and support staff in schools for their work; no doubt they will lean in and support this task to ensure that school return can be done as safely as possible.
Finally, I echo the hon. Gentleman’s words and wish him a happy and safe Christmas. I look forward very much to seeing him again in January.

Jeremy Hunt: In the past week, I have received unexpectedly joyful emails from residents of South West Surrey who have been  among the first in the world to receive a clinically approved vaccine for coronavirus. I thank my right hon. Friend for that early Christmas present. I also thank him for the energy, for the endless media rounds and for the dedication that he has shown in the past year, which must have been one of the toughest imaginable for a Health Secretary. I am also grateful that Waverley has been excluded from the Surrey-wide move to tier 3, in recognition of our lower infection rates, although we will remain vigilant.
I want to ask my right hon. Friend about Christmas, just a week away. Of course personal responsibility matters, but, in a pandemic, so does clarity. Irrespective of the law or the regulations, should we or should we not have indoor social gatherings with elderly and vulnerable family members?

Matthew Hancock: People should act with great caution in this pandemic, because doing so protects them, protects their families and protects their loved ones. We have set out what the rules are, but they are not a limit up to which we should all push. We can all act within those rules to limit the spread, by reducing social contact in the days up to meeting a family member who may be, for instance, over 70—or any other family member. It is reasonable and responsible to take that sort of action.
I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for what he said about the vaccine roll-out. I have been cheered by the messages I get from constituents and others now that they are receiving the vaccine. We just have to ensure that we get the deployment out as fast as the vaccine can reasonably be produced and as fast as the NHS can deploy it, so that we get people the safety of that vaccine and so that we can get through this and out of this as soon as possible.

Martyn Day: It is important that the festive days ahead do not become a five-day mass get-together. Therefore, we should use as little of the flexibility as possible, spread over several days, while ensuring that no one is facing Christmas alone. The concerns from medical professionals that the Christmas covid restriction relaxation will cost lives are not to be dismissed lightly. Does the Secretary of State agree that if people are to form a bubble, it should be kept as small as possible? If so, would it not be better to follow the Scottish approach, which sets a strict maximum limit on the numbers, up to eight people from three households, rather than the potentially unlimited numbers permitted currently in English bubbles?

Matthew Hancock: This has been an incredibly difficult year for so many people and so many families. The fixed numerical limits place a particular burden on very large families. We have taken, I think, a balanced and right approach, but while I understand the urge for caution—of course I understand that, from my NHS colleagues and others—I also understand that people want to see their children and their loved ones. Christmas is an important time of year, and we have to find a balance.

Bernard Jenkin: I join my right hon. Friend in wishing NHS staff and everyone in this crisis a happy Christmas. Will he join me in wishing Essex County Council and local authorities in Essex a happy Christmas for what they have contributed to the test, track and trace operation since NHS Test and Trace started to share data much more quickly with local authorities? I can report to him that most districts  have started door-knocking to follow up the contacts of cases, and the complete case contact rates are now around 87% and 90% respectively. Will he join me in congratulating the local authorities of Essex on this tremendous effort?

Matthew Hancock: My hon. Friend is absolutely right, and I am grinning because I think this is the first time in the dozens and dozens of statements I have made this year when the hon. Member for Leicester South (Jonathan Ashworth) has not mentioned track and trace. I will tell you why, Madam Deputy Speaker: the latest statistics show that where communications were available, 96.6% of people were reached and told to self-isolate. That is because of the huge improvements in contact tracing and testing that have been delivered this year—[Hon. Members: “By local authorities.”] Including, of course, by local authority partners, but also by the brilliant national NHS Test and Trace system, which we should all congratulate. Getting those contact rates—[Interruption.]

Eleanor Laing: Order. This is not a moment for shouting. Listen to the Secretary of State.

Matthew Hancock: I think the moment when we see contact rates of more than 90% should be one where everybody comes together and says thank you and well done to everybody at NHS Test and Trace and all their partners, whether they are in the public sector or are the brilliant private sector partners that we all support.

Judith Cummins: Happy Christmas to you and yours, Madam Deputy Speaker. The Secretary of State will know the significant effect that the pandemic has had on NHS dentistry. There is a backlog of more than 19 million appointments. It is therefore shocking and unacceptable that NHS England has just decided to impose a new activity target on dentists in England, which many simply will not be able to meet under new covid restrictions. NHS England’s own data show that nearly 60% of dental practices will be hit by severe financial penalties. Dentists will now need to prioritise check-ups rather than dealing with the backlog of patients needing treatment while others may be forced to close entirely—a straight choice between staying financially liable or treating those in pain with more complex problems. Will the Secretary of State reverse this decision, which threatens patient safety and access and could lead to the demise of NHS dentistry as we know it?

Matthew Hancock: I am very glad to be able to reassure the hon. Lady that the agreement that has been reached with the dentists is all about ensuring that while we support our NHS dentists we see them do as much as they can to look after people and help them get the treatments they need. This is a good, balanced programme and I am sure it will be implemented well by the dentists.

Liam Fox: May I say how delighted I am that North Somerset is moving down into tier 2, which is just reward for the efforts of my constituents and the whole community and also offers great potential help for our hospitality industry as we go into the Christmas period? On the question of balance, I completely agree with my right hon. Friend that we have to consider not just the number of people and the number of households but the age and vulnerability  of those who are meeting? May I say, echoing the words of my colleague, that I wish a very happy Christmas to my right hon. Friend and his team of Ministers, who have done the most difficult job imaginable in a rather exceptional way? I hope—although without much expectation—that they will get some break over the Christmas period.

Matthew Hancock: The people of North Somerset, who my right hon. Friend represents, and those of nearby Weston-super-Mare have done a remarkable job of bringing the case rates down to 120 for every 100,000. I am very pleased that we are able to take North Somerset out of tier 3 into tier 2. I would also say to everybody that the point about personal responsibility that my hon. Friend stressed and that I strongly agree with still applies. Coming out of a tier makes life easier, of course—we do not want the tiers in place any longer than absolutely necessary—but it is still on everyone in North Somerset, as well as in Bristol and Herefordshire, which have also come down, to do their bit and keep those case rates down.

Karl Turner: The lead-up to Christmas is the busiest period for hospitality businesses, with some pubs in my constituency making up to a quarter of their annual profits, which are now lost. If measures to control the virus are to be effective, they must go hand in hand with proper business support. To protect lives and livelihoods, what will the Secretary of State do to ensure that businesses forming the backbone of my communities in Hull get the financial support they desperately need?

Matthew Hancock: I feel gratitude to everyone in Hull for the work they have done to get case rates down as far as they have. Hull has done well, along with the rest of the Humber area, but we are not quite there yet. We are providing the support that comes with being part of tier 3, and we have put record sums in to support hospitality, but I appreciate that this is tough, especially in the run-up to Christmas. I can commit to keep working with the hon. Gentleman and other colleagues across Hull, the Humber and other areas in tier 3 to do everything we can to get hospitality open again.

Kate Griffiths: I pay tribute to the work of Staffordshire County Council in rolling out rapid, large-scale asymptomatic community testing in my constituency of Burton and Uttoxeter. The director of health has raised a number of concerns with the Department about the lack of clarity over funding for those tests. Will my right hon. Friend review the three letters that have been sent to his Department on that issue, to provide the clarity that is urgently needed to allow this testing to continue?

Matthew Hancock: Yes, I will get on to it right away. I am really glad that Staffordshire has worked hard on getting this community testing going. Stoke-on-Trent was one of the first places in the country to get going on it, and now we have spread it out wider in Staffs. I will pick up the point that my hon. Friend raises and get back to her straightaway.

Stella Creasy: The Secretary of State tells us about personal responsibility. Does he recognise that he has a responsibility to be  honest with the public about what is happening? This week, Whipps Cross Hospital had to turn away ambulances because the ICU was full as a direct result of the rising covid infections in our local community, and the hospital had to move to early discharge of patients. He says that he is publishing data. Will he commit to publishing real-time data about A&E “firebreaks”, ICU capacity and what planned surgeries have been cancelled by hospitals, so that the public can see the truth about why and how we need to protect the NHS and what impact it has on their health outcomes?

Matthew Hancock: The hon. Lady is absolutely right about the impact of the virus on the NHS in her part of the world in north-east London. Whipps Cross Hospital is under significant pressure. The case rate in her Waltham Forest local authority is 431 per 100,000. We have to work together to get the cases down, especially in east London, where they are very significant. We publish a huge amount of data on hospital admissions and the impact on the NHS, and I am publishing further data on this today and putting it in the Library of the House.

Felicity Buchan: I am glad to see that three areas are coming down a tier. That is vital for compliance, because the general public need to see that if they follow the rules and get their cases under control, there will be a pay-off. Does my right hon. Friend agree that what is important is complying with existing restrictions, rather than ever more severe restrictions, and it is critical that we take the public, including the young, with us?

Matthew Hancock: I agree with every word that my hon. Friend just said. I strongly agree that the best way to get out of tier 3 is by everybody coming together to comply with the restrictions—and not just to comply with them because they are the law but to take responsibility to ensure that we do not spread the virus, which each one of us can do unwittingly because of its asymptomatic nature. I thank my hon. Friend for her question and for the message that it sends: we can get areas out of tier 3 and we can get areas out of tier 2 and into tier 1, but we all have to work at it.

Munira Wilson: I asked the Secretary of State, via a written question, what estimate his Department had made of the proportion of the population not registered with a GP, to which the answer was:
“No such estimate has been made.”
I found that concerning, given how important GPs are to the roll-out of the covid-19 vaccine, not least for vulnerable populations such as the homeless and those who move around a lot. Will the Secretary of State please explain what plans and provisions are being made to ensure that the vaccine is available to those who are not registered with GPs?

Matthew Hancock: The hon. Lady raises an incredibly important point. It does not matter whether or not somebody is registered with anybody, they can still spread the disease. The reason for the answer that she was given is that we have to try to get the vaccination programme out to everybody, no matter their status. There are people who do not have any status in paperwork at all, and we need to make sure that we support the roll-out to them as well. We are working with the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, which is best placed, along with local authorities, to  make sure that the vaccination programme reaches anybody who fulfils the criteria set out by the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation.

Mark Harper: I welcome the fact that Gloucestershire is remaining in tier 2 and thank the Secretary of State for his engagement with me and my Gloucestershire colleagues this week—it was very much appreciated and it was very much a team effort to get to where we are. May I press him a little on what he said about vaccines? Will he confirm that the data that is going to be published from next week will have enough detail in it that we will be able to see clearly the vaccination roll-out by age and by area? Will he set out, early on when we return in January, the Government’s thinking about how far the vaccination programme needs to have gone and the level of risk that we will have reduced for the country such that we can start to release the restrictions that are so burdensome on our population?

Matthew Hancock: Yes. We are committed to setting out weekly updates on the vaccination programme—we released the first data yesterday, on the 137,000 number—and increasingly with the sorts of breakdowns that my right hon. Friend asks for, as more and more groups are reached. He asked for the calculus in terms of the proportion of the population that needs to be protected in order that we are able to bring down restrictions, and that is exactly how we are thinking about the next phase. We do not yet know the impact of the vaccine on transmission, so we cannot yet have a concrete answer to his question, but it is precisely the question that we are asking. We should know much more within the next few weeks.

Chris Stephens: Recent studies have shown that vaccine hesitancy is highest among the black, Asian and minority ethnic community and low-income groups, and there is a real fear that these groups are being deliberately targeted with misinformation. Will the Secretary of State tell us how his Department is going to counter that so that people can make informed choices, and to avoid covid health disparities going forward?

Matthew Hancock: The hon. Gentleman is right to raise this issue. In fact, I was talking about the vaccination programme to the SNP Cabinet Secretary for Health only this morning, because making sure that we reach all those who need vaccinations, according to clinical need, is critical, but we also need then to persuade them to take the vaccine. There is a huge amount of work on tackling misinformation. The most important thing is to have the positive information out there. I thank all those who have gone public about their vaccine so far—we all saw the wonderful photograph of Sir Ian McKellen, and I thank Prue Leith, who went public with her vaccination. It is absolutely terrific to see people celebrating the fact that they are getting vaccinated and therefore encouraging other people to do the same.

Graham Brady: This statement will be greeted with dismay in Greater Manchester, where we have had severe restrictions for nine months and where rates in nine of the 10 boroughs are below the national average. My constituents have  behaved responsibly and our rates are lower than those in neighbouring Warrington or Cheshire, which have been put into tier 2, and they are also lower than they are in Bristol, which has been moved from tier 3 to tier 2 today. What exactly do we have to be moved out of tier 3?

Matthew Hancock: I understand my hon. Friend’s disappointment at this decision. We looked very closely at Trafford, Stockport, Tameside and nearby High Peak, and the proposal to take a different decision for them from the one that had been taken for their near neighbours. The challenge is that each time we have done that in the past, we have then seen cases rebound, and there continues to be significant pressure on the NHS in the north-west, including in Manchester. I know that my hon. Friend and I have proposed different approaches on this one, and I look forward to working with him and people right across Manchester to get this sorted.

Rachel Hopkins: We need to make sure that schools continue to be a safe environment for students and staff, and I would like to take the opportunity to thank all school staff and headteachers across Luton, who have done so much to make their schools as covid-secure as possible. I note the point made by the Secretary of State about the announcement later regarding testing in schools, but will the Government be publishing the evidence to support the use of lateral flow tests for serial testing of students, as this is outside the licensed use and requires a change to the legal duty to isolate?

Matthew Hancock: We are working on exactly that proposal, because the need to use testing and use the easily available and rapid-return lateral flow devices is incredibly important. They have an important role to play, used in the right settings, in the same way that the PCR tests have an important role to play, but it takes longer to get the results back with those tests. I look forward to working with the hon. Lady, with Luton council, and with all those across Bedfordshire to try to get this sorted. Clearly, case rates in Bedfordshire are shooting up in a very worrying way, and I thank her for her efforts and public health messaging to say to everybody right across Bedfordshire, including in Luton, “Let’s work together to get this sorted.”

Greg Clark: I asked my right hon. Friend to consider restrictions on a more local level than county-wide, and I am grateful that he has done so across the country today. Infections in Tunbridge Wells, while much lower than the average for the county of Kent as a whole, are nevertheless rising, and there is pressure on the local NHS, so I understand why there is no change from tier 3 today. However, will the Secretary of State commit to apply the five tests fortnightly, and to reduce our level of restrictions as soon as they are met? Will he also have a word with the Chancellor to see what extra support can be given to businesses in the hospitality sector, which have just lost the most important part of the trading year in what has been a miserable year for them?

Matthew Hancock: Yes, of course I will talk to the Chancellor about the point that my right hon. Friend raises. Of course, we do already have a significant amount of support for hospitality businesses, but I understand how difficult this is.
On the point about looking at local areas, we will absolutely do so, as we have demonstrated in the decisions taken today. For instance, just over the border in East Sussex, we have unfortunately had to put Hastings and Rother into tier 3. Tunbridge Wells today has a case rate of 288 per 100,000, and I would say to everybody right across Kent that we really need to act with serious responsibility. No matter which part of Kent a person is in, we have a very serious problem in Kent, and the only way in which we can get it under control is for people in Kent to essentially behave as if they have the virus and are trying not to pass it on to somebody else. Be really cautious in Kent: it is the area of the country that has the biggest problem in terms case rates, and therefore there are huge pressures on the NHS in Kent. I thank everyone who works in the NHS in Kent for what they are doing.
We are putting in as much support as we can, and I look forward to working with my right hon. Friend, all colleagues from across Kent and of course the county council and district councils to try to get this under control. Other parts of the country have done it and brought the case rate down, and we have been able to take some into tier 2. I am sure that we can get there in Kent, but we have to work hard to make that happen.

Kevan Jones: On Monday, I asked the Secretary of State when care home residents in County Durham would get the vaccine and he did not answer the question. I have now been contacted by GPs in Chester-le-Street in my constituency who were first promised the vaccine on 16 December. That was put back to 21 December. Having done all the work to set up the hub, they have now been told that the vaccine will not be available till the new year. So when will residents in Chester-le-Street get the vaccine? I do not want hype or generalisations; I just want a straightforward answer for those constituents.

Matthew Hancock: We are opening more and more GP vaccination hubs each day. The answer specifically on Chester-le-Street is as soon as we practically can, but it has to be done in a safe way. That is out my hands and out of the right hon. Gentleman’s hands. An important operational set of procedures needs to be gone through to open the hubs. It is complicated. I will look into the right hon. Gentleman’s example and write to him with details, but he will understand, as I am sure the people of Chester-le-Street will, that we are trying to get the vaccine rolled out as quickly and as safely as possible, but “safely” is an important part of that.

Neil O'Brien: Will my right hon. Friend confirm that if people in Harborough and Oadby and Wigston continue to drive down rates of infection locally, the different districts and boroughs in Leicestershire can be put in different tiers if the data supports that? Will he join me in congratulating our local NHS here in Leicestershire on the efficient way in which it is rolling out the vaccine across the county?

Matthew Hancock: Yes on both counts. We looked at Leicestershire in great detail and I wish that we could have taken the county and the city out of tier 3. Unfortunately the data did not support that conclusion.  I am grateful to everybody across Leicestershire, because I know that this has been a long, hard slog with measures in place for a long time.

Liz Twist: I start by thanking the people of my constituency and across Gateshead who have worked really hard to get the figure down. Professor Michael Marmot’s covid-19 review, which was published this week, shows that the pandemic has exposed long-standing health inequalities, particularly in the north. Public health teams play a vital part in this pandemic and are core to addressing those longer-term health inequalities. What has the Secretary of State done to ensure that public health teams are properly funded so that they can address those inequities and, as Professor Marmot says, “build back fairer”?

Matthew Hancock: We are absolutely determined to build back better. That needs to involve tackling long-term underlying health inequalities. A huge programme of work will be needed to do that, after the pandemic has demonstrated those inequalities.
People in Gateshead have done a great job of getting the case rate down. Like other areas, it is still in tier 3—we are not quite there yet. I know that my team and the hon. Lady’s local director of public health have been talking about getting Gateshead and the rest of the north-east into tier 2 when we can. I hope that we can do that, but for now, let us be cautious and keep this under control.

Julian Sturdy: There will naturally be disappointment across Yorkshire as many areas stay in tier 3. I appreciate that York’s tier will be affected by the current virus picture, but which of the five criteria will the city of York have to improve on to stand a good chance of moving down a tier in future reviews? Will that depend significantly on how our neighbouring local authorities perform against the five criteria?

Matthew Hancock: We do look at those human geographies because many people commute from North Yorkshire into York, but York and many of the local authorities around it have done an absolutely fantastic job of bringing the virus under control. In York, the case rate is 65 per 100,000—a bit higher than we typically take places into tier 1. For instance, Herefordshire is 45, which is the same level Cornwall was when it was put into tier 1, but York is moving in the right direction. The over-60s case rate is also low. There has been some pressure, as my hon. Friend knows, on the hospital, but that is abating. Therefore, York and large swathes of North Yorkshire are moving in the right direction. I urge everybody right across North Yorkshire to stick at it.

Barbara Keeley: The Secretary of State will remember that he has agreed to meet me and my constituent Kellie Shiers to discuss the issues that she has had accessing cancer services during the pandemic. During the pandemic, Kelly worked on the frontline with her ambulance service in Greater Manchester, despite her history of breast cancer, but she could not have her check-up and mammogram when it was due. When she did have it, the cancer had returned and spread to her bones. She is now having chemotherapy and may need surgery. I understand that  the Secretary of State has many demands on his time, but can he ensure that this meeting is able to go ahead in early January as these matters are time-sensitive?

Matthew Hancock: Yes, I can. I am very sorry that that meeting has not happened yet and we will get right on to it for early January.

Richard Fuller: The changes for Bedfordshire announced by my right hon. Friend will be disappointing to residents and businesses, but it will be helpful for them to understand that, in setting up the tier system, my right hon. Friend established clear criteria, and he is publishing the data and has said that he will be open to regular reviews. On those criteria, when it comes to the issue of hospitals and pressure on the NHS, that is not a data-driven criterion; it comes with statements that the NHS is under considerable pressure, which is very difficult for people to understand, because we always hear, during pre-covid times and now, that the hospitals are under pressure. So will he commit to producing projections of occupancy rates and acute bed occupancy rates across the NHS and, if possible, on a local hospital system basis?

Matthew Hancock: Yes, we are working exactly on how to demonstrate that in a numerical rather than a narrative form, not least for the reasons that my hon. Friend sets out. We have seen a very sharp rise in cases across Bedfordshire, especially in the more rural areas, including North East Bedfordshire, so it is so important that people across Bedfordshire take that personal responsibility and follow the new tier 3 rules. I hope that we can get the rate to come down as fast as it has gone up.

Toby Perkins: People across Chesterfield will be very disappointed that, with all the work that they have done and with Chesterfield having lower transmission rates than some of the areas in tier 2, they remain in tier 3. They will be especially disappointed by the Health Secretary’s suggestion that the communities that have worked hardest and been the most disciplined are the ones that are in tier 2. We know that that is not the case. Does he not realise that, if the Government could offer a support package that supported our hospitality sector, and if they were not, at the very last minute, announcing changes to our schools just two days before they break up, there would be more credibility to the sense that it is personal responsibility that is the problem here, rather than the ineptitude of this Government?

Matthew Hancock: No.

Edward Leigh: On behalf of my right hon. Friend the Member for South Holland and The Deepings (Sir John Hayes), may I thank the Secretary of State for meeting us and for promising that he will adopt a more granular approach? We can assure him that we will work hard in Lincolnshire to try to get our tier, and that of the neighbouring cities, down. May I also thank him and the Prime Minister for resisting pressure from the Opposition and from Wales and Scotland to change the rules on Christmas? That is an entirely right approach. I also thank him for the tone that he has adopted today that, if we are to defeat this, it is a matter of self-responsibility and personal ownership of our health.

Matthew Hancock: Thatis right. We looked very closely at the southern end of Lincolnshire, which is a long way from where the rates are incredibly elevated around Lincoln, the coast and West Lindsey, but unfortunately it was not possible to bring any of the lower-tier local authority areas in Lincolnshire out of tier 3, and over the border in Peterborough we have seen a very sharp rise. So we are not there yet, but I hope that we can make significant progress, especially if everyone listens to my right hon. Friend and takes personal responsibility for their actions and tries to do everything they can not to pass the disease on.

Jack Dromey: Jane Roche is a great champion of her community of Castle Vale. Her dad, Vincent, died of covid. Her sister Jocelyn died five days later of covid. They are two of the nearly 10,000 in the west midlands who have died of covid. Jane and her family are devastated. They grieve for the loss of their loved ones who will not be with them this Christmas. She asks the Secretary of State this: why have we had the largest number of deaths in Europe? Can we be confident that lessons are being learnt and that the mistakes made will not be repeated? She also asks: when will the inquiry into what happened over covid be established and, crucially, will the Secretary of State meet her and other relatives of those who have sadly died from across Birmingham?

Matthew Hancock: Yes, I am very happy to meet the hon. Gentleman and constituents to hear their stories. Many of us have lost those close to us in this terrible pandemic. We are constantly learning how to do things better, and we are constantly learning more about the disease. For instance, the news earlier this week about a new variant was because our surveillance system enables us to look out for changes and try to understand them. There are huge challenges, as he knows, but I always try to approach this by looking at how we can get the country through what is an incredibly difficult and unprecedented time with as few people as possible suffering in the way that his constituent, Jane, has.

Rob Butler: The news that Buckinghamshire is going into tier 3 heralds the bleakest of midwinters, especially for local hospitality businesses, and it is imperative that they get extra help and that this lasts for as short a time as humanly possible. Given that Stoke Mandeville Hospital is currently under intense pressure, with many staff off, either with covid or self-isolating, it is alarming that Buckinghamshire Healthcare NHS Trust has been given no date for when it will get a supply of vaccines, especially when neighbouring Oxfordshire is in a lower tier and already has them. Will my right hon. Friend ensure that residents and healthcare staff can get the vaccine locally in Buckinghamshire before Christmas?

Matthew Hancock: I will write to my hon. Friend immediately with our plans for the roll-out of primary care-based vaccination facilities in Aylesbury. I regret having to put Buckinghamshire into tier 3 measures, but unfortunately it was absolutely necessary on the numbers. Aylesbury Vale, the local authority area, has a case rate of 235 per 100,000 and it is rising really sharply, and my hon. Friend has set out the challenges at Stoke Mandeville, which is an excellent hospital but under significant pressure. I am glad that he understands why we have  had to take this decision and I hope that across Buckinghamshire we can get these cases down and get people vaccinated as soon as possible.

Jeff Smith: Secondary schools in south Manchester are worried about the extra pressure of running a mass testing regime on top of the contact tracing they are doing, on top of the online learning they are enabling and on top of their normal, everyday school responsibilities. We really need to know what support they are going to get to do the testing, so why does the Secretary of State for Education not come to the House to set out the plans and answer questions, as the Secretary of State for Health rightly does?

Matthew Hancock: The Secretary of State for Education will be setting out these plans. We need to get them out as soon as possible so that people have the last couple of days of term to work on them, and he will be doing that. Testing in schools is incredibly important, and it is going to become more important as we roll it out more broadly. I am really glad to hear some of the statements from the teaching unions about how enthusiastic they are for testing, especially in secondary schools. I am sure that the Education Secretary will want to work with the hon. Gentleman and others right across the country to roll out this programme as effectively as possible and to make sure that we have high-quality testing in schools, so that we can keep kids in education as much as possible and get the infection rate down by finding the positive cases and having them isolate.

William Wragg: It being Christmas, and given the circumstances that we are in, covid-compliant carol singers in Stockport have been heard singing the words of that well-known epidemiologist Mariah Carey, “All I want for Christmas is tier 2”, but sadly their entreating that outcome has not been successful at all. Can my right hon. Friend explain, further to the question from my hon. Friend the Member for Altrincham and Sale West (Sir Graham Brady), precisely what more residents in Stockport need to do in order to regain some relative freedom?

Matthew Hancock: Yes. We have to keep getting the case rate down. In Stockport it is still over 100. There is further to go. Right across Greater Manchester and the surrounding areas, I would urge people to do as they have been doing, because the case rates have come down really quite significantly. Right across Greater Manchester and in Stockport, people have been doing the right thing, but the pressures on the NHS remain, partly from people who are in hospital with covid from when the rates were really high. I hope that we can make the move as soon as possible, and in the meantime I hope that everybody has a happy, safe and careful Christmas in Stockport.

Ellie Reeves: UK and EU pharmaceutical companies have warned that no deal will lead to delays of up to six weeks in obtaining vital medicines. Given that the Pfizer vaccine is complex to move and distributed from Brussels at -70°, does the Health Secretary agree that no deal would be catastrophic and that everything should be done to get a deal to protect our access to vital medicines?

Matthew Hancock: We have plans in place to ensure that the vaccine can continue to be distributed whatever the outcome of the discussions on a future trading arrangement with the EU.

Robert Halfon: Early this morning I visited a vaccination centre in Harlow that is running like a military operation and has started vaccinating the elderly and those in care homes. Will my right hon. Friend thank West Essex clinical commissioning group, GPs, staff and volunteers who are vaccinating many hundreds of Harlow residents? Will he also set out a route map by which Harlow can return to tier 2? I strongly welcome the testing announced for schools, but can he confirm that school openings will not be delayed in January?

Matthew Hancock: I am very grateful for what my right hon. Friend says about the vaccination centre in Harlow. It is an uplifting sight visiting a vaccination centre. Rarely have I seen so many smiles on faces this year, which has been such a difficult year, as when I visited the Milton Keynes vaccination centre last week. I am really glad that it is working well in Harlow. I add my thanks to his thanks to the GPs, the volunteers and the staff—all those organising the vaccinations.
In terms of a route map out of the tier, of course in time the vaccination programme will help, but for now the best thing people can do is to bring the case rate down by doing everything they personally can to not pass on this disease. Unfortunately the case rate in Harlow is 302 per 100,000—very, very elevated—and in nearby Epping Forest, unfortunately, it is over 500. It is a very serious problem. We all have to pull together to try to sort out this growth of the virus locally, and that is the route to tier 2.

Eleanor Laing: May I echo to the Secretary of State what my right hon. Friend the Member for Harlow (Robert Halfon) said on behalf of the people of our community?

Sarah Owen: Scientific advisers, healthcare workers and doctors have all warned that the Christmas season will result in higher infection rates. The public are not fools and know that tougher restrictions will likely be needed in the new year. Will the Secretary of State come out with the obvious and admit now that he will need to bring in harsher restrictions in January, ending the uncertainty faced by families and businesses, or will he just allow these dangerous mixed messages to continue from Government?

Matthew Hancock: Where I agree with the hon. Lady is that the public are not fools; the public know that it is their responsibility, as well as the Government’s, to get this under control. That is where the emphasis on people taking personal responsibility to ensure that they do not pass on the virus this Christmas comes from. If we look at how the public across Luton and the whole country have behaved during this pandemic, under restrictions that are so inimical to our way of life and unprecedented, we see that people have still followed them because they know that they are important. That is the approach we are trying to take for Christmas, to make sure that we can keep this precious time of year, but in a way that is safe.

Jason McCartney: I accepted Kirklees being in tier 3 when we had some of the highest covid rates in the country, but cases have now plummeted and hospitalisations are down. The case rate in Kirklees is about 167—below the English average—and in my Colne Valley constituency the case rates are actually under 100 per 100,000, and therefore I really thought we had a strong case to be brought down into tier 2. I appreciate that the Secretary of State wants to be cautious, but can he tell me when will the next review be, and what more do my constituents need to do to come out of tier 3?

Matthew Hancock: Legally, there is a review every two weeks, but in practice we review every week, and I will not wait a week longer than necessary to get places out of tier 3 if we can safely do that. To people across Colne Valley I would say, first, that the reduction in rates has been impressive, but we are not there yet. The pressure on the NHS has reduced, but is still significant. I would also say to everybody in Colne Valley that they have a Member of Parliament who probably makes his case to me more than any other. It is not for want of effort from the local MP, but this decision is based on the epidemiology, and I really hope we can get there soon.

Feryal Clark: Madam Deputy Speaker, can I take this opportunity to wish you and the House staff a merry Christmas and a very happy new year?
I have had numerous emails from unpaid carers in Enfield North concerned about access to the vaccine. Can the Secretary of State set out exactly when unpaid carers will be given the covid-19 vaccine, given that they spend their time caring for extremely vulnerable people and could pass on the virus? Any guidance would be a huge comfort to residents and their unpaid carers in Enfield North.

Matthew Hancock: The guidance has been set out by the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation. I think it is very important that we follow the clinical advice in this prioritisation to make sure that it is fair.

Richard Holden: I would like to thank the Department of Health and Social Care and the Secretary of State for everything they are doing, but I am sure he will appreciate, like me, just how fed up my local hospitality sector is across County Durham and the north-east. Will he join me in thanking local people for everything they are doing, because case rates have really come down? Will he also thank my local NHS staff? I saw them, when I visited on a night shift a couple of weeks ago, not only giving care to people with covid, but really showing love to them as they look after them. Will he commit to a fortnightly review, and will he ignore the LA7 group of local authorities and allow County Durham and perhaps parts of the north-east to go a separate way if case rates come down in the future? Can he update me and write to me about the vaccine roll-out, and will he also push the Chancellor for extra support for my local hospitality sector?

Matthew Hancock: Yes, of course; I will write to my hon. Friend as soon as I can on the roll-out of the vaccine across his part of County Durham. Making sure that everybody can get access is so important, hence we are taking this community-led approach as well as using the  big hospital sites. The truth is that we do look at County Durham on its own merits, as well of course as a part of the other north-east local authorities. People in County Durham have been acting in a way that gets the case rates down, and I am very grateful to them for doing that. We are not quite there yet and there is still that pressure on the NHS, but we are moving in the right direction.

Richard Burgon: In the past 100 days, more than 23,000 people in our country have lost their lives due to covid. That scale of loss was completely unnecessary; it is the result of a second wave caused by this Government’s failing to put public health first. We know the Government ignored the scientists’ advice in September before that second wave hit, and we know scientists are warning that the current plans, including for Christmas, are going to cause a deadly third wave. Will the Secretary of State come clean today and tell us how many lives Government scientists are warning him will be lost over the next few weeks under the current plans?

Matthew Hancock: The advice I have and the answer to the hon. Gentleman is, I hope, as few as possible—especially as we get the vaccine rolling out. I want to pick up something he said about this pandemic. This pandemic is caused by the virus, not by any Government around the world. It is caused by the virus, and that is why it is so important that we all come together to try to tackle it, rather than trying to take this overly politicised approach.

Desmond Swayne: His waitress tested positive, so the proprietor of the small café closed immediately and went into self-isolation, but test, track and trace has not contacted him, so he is without the wherewithal to claim the allowance. Can the Secretary of State fix it?

Matthew Hancock: Yes, if my right hon. Friend has the test reference number I will get on to it right away. If NHS Test and Trace has not contacted the owner, that might imply that he does not have to self-isolate, but of course I will want to look into the details of the case before making such a recommendation. I will ensure that my right hon. Friend’s constituents get a full, clinically approved recommendation ASAP.

Barry Gardiner: Mr James Canning became our first octogenarian in Brent to receive the vaccine earlier this week. While congratulating him and the Wembley Practice team who delivered it, does the Secretary of State share my concern that care homes in Brent have been advised that the 970 doses that are in the vaccine packs cannot be split because of the licensing conditions, meaning that those in our care homes who are over 80 may have to wait until February or for the Oxford vaccine before they get vaccinated? Is that the case? If so, why? That is hardly the “protective ring” around care homes that he promised.

Matthew Hancock: I am glad to say that we are making significant progress on tackling this issue. When the hon. Gentleman says it is a licensing concern, that should not be read to imply that it is some bureaucratic rule; it is about ensuring that things are done safely. If the vaccine is not delivered safely to the site, it is not an  effective vaccine. Therefore, we are taking it carefully to be able to vaccinate in care homes. There has been some vaccination in care homes across the UK, so it can be done, and I hope we can make good progress soon.

Neil Hudson: I thank my right hon. Friend for the reassurance he gave me last week about the vaccine roll-out to rural communities. Will he join me in paying tribute to everyone in Cumbria and the wider UK who is involved in the delivery of the covid vaccination programme, and does he agree that the best way we can build a positive 2021 is for people to actively take up their invitation to have this vital vaccine when it comes, and to get their life-saving jab as soon as it is offered?

Matthew Hancock: I could not agree more with my hon. Friend. He knows about these things, and he is exactly right that the best thing everyone can do, when the NHS calls, is to take up that vaccine and get it done. It will protect them and their community and help to protect the whole country and get us all out of these restrictions at which we choke.

Wendy Chamberlain: Yesterday, on College Green, I met members of the Covid-19 Bereaved Families for Justice group and spoke with those who have lost loved ones during the pandemic and will be spending a first Christmas without them. They delivered a 200,000-strong petition to Downing Street asking for an immediate public inquiry in order to identify and learn lessons. There has been an ongoing inquiry by the all-party parliamentary group on coronavirus, to which the group has given evidence. May I ask whether the Secretary of State has read the APPG’s interim report and engaged with its findings?

Matthew Hancock: I look at all these sorts of reports, as does the team at the Department, constantly to try to learn. Given that this is an unprecedented situation, all health authorities across the UK, whether here or in Edinburgh, Cardiff or Belfast, are constantly talking and trying to make sure that all the insights that can be gained can be applied. One example is that we now have contact tracing in the UK reaching over 90% of contacts. That is due to hard work and improvement, learning the insights from each other about how we can make systems better.

Bob Blackman: I am sure I speak on behalf of the whole House in thanking my right hon. Friend and his team for all their hard work over the course of this year to combat this dreadful virus, and also for updating the House on a regular basis on what action is being taken. May I give him the opportunity to reiterate the key message as we approach Christmas: that anyone who shows any signs of having the virus must get a test and, if it is positive, must self-isolate and not mix and mingle with people, so we can cut down on the spread of this dreadful virus? People must think twice before they mix with elderly relatives if they have been in contact with anyone who has had this dreadful virus.

Matthew Hancock: I agree with every word my hon. Friend has just said. Over this Christmas period, I hope that people will, yes, take a moment to have some  relaxation, especially given what a tough year it has been, and have the chance to see loved ones, but do so carefully, knowing that one in three people who have this disease does not know that they have it because they have no symptoms. Anybody can be inadvertently passing it on to a vulnerable loved one, so they need to be very, very careful. To reiterate, it is in the best interests of everybody, their loved ones and their community to get a test at the first sign of symptoms—testing is now very, very widely available right across the country—and if the test is positive or if they are contacted by NHS Test and Trace because they are a contact, to isolate and do so not just because they have to but because it is the right thing to do to isolate fully and properly.
Finally, I strongly agree with my hon. Friend in wanting to thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, the whole of your team and all the staff of the House for supporting me in the many times I have had to come to the House this year and, in what has been an incredibly difficult year for the House as well as for the nation, for all the work they have done to support us in keeping our democracy going all the way through this, no matter how bad it got.

Eleanor Laing: I thank the Secretary of State for his kind words. The whole House, and certainly the whole of Mr Speaker’s team, thank the Secretary of State, his Ministers and the shadow Ministers, who have worked so hard to keep us informed all the way through this dreadful pandemic.

Jim Shannon: rose—

Eleanor Laing: It is alright. I have not forgotten that we have a late entry. The final question—I call Jim Shannon.

Jim Shannon: May I take this opportunity to wish you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and your family a very merry Christmas and happy new year? Thank you for all you do in this House. I congratulate the Secretary of State and all his team on their energy and dedication in what has been an extremely difficult year. It has given us encouragement whenever he has come to the House.
Students, families and workers from England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland will be travelling by boat, train, car and plane to meet their families from all tiers and very strict conditions. What discussions has the Secretary of State had with the devolved Administrations, in particular Northern Ireland, to ensure that travel can continue to happen within the regulations that we must all adhere to?

Matthew Hancock: I thank the hon. Gentleman very much for his kind words. He said that people have been encouraged every time I have come to the Dispatch Box. Given some of the things I have had to announce, I am sure that is not quite true, but it has been my duty to come and answer questions as much as possible. I have probably answered more questions from the hon. Gentleman than from anyone, and I am very happy to answer this last one for this year.
I spoke to Robin Swann, the Health Minister for Northern Ireland, this morning as part of a call with all four of us across the devolved Administrations. We are determined to ensure that people can travel across the whole of the UK as much as is safely possible, but,  again, we urge caution and personal responsibility. People can take advantage of this change in the regulations over Christmas to see loved ones—sometimes loved ones they have not been able to see all year—but we urge them to do that with the appropriate concern for the risk of spreading the disease, and to make sure, therefore, that everybody has a merry Christmas and a happy new year. We will return here, no doubt, in 2021 with the hope of that vaccine coming fast into view so that we can get to the point where I do not have to return every week to discuss restrictions and, instead, we can all get our freedom back.

Eleanor Laing: I thank the Secretary of State for his patience in going through the whole statement, and everyone who is here to continue doing their duty on behalf of their constituents. We hope that the Secretary of State has a little bit of rest over Christmas, but we are all pretty sure that he will continue working to try to keep our people safe. Thank you.
In order to allow everyone in the Chamber the safety to leave without the hordes coming in for the next statement, I will suspend the House for a few minutes.
Sitting suspended.

Provisional Local Government Finance Settlement

Robert Jenrick: Today I have written to all local authorities in England thanking their councillors, officers and employees for their exceptional service this year. From carers to teachers to social workers to refuse collectors to council officers, as well as the elected members, they have worked tirelessly over the course of this pandemic to keep us safe, to provide support to the most vulnerable, to assist local businesses and to deliver public services under immense pressure. I think I speak for the whole House in saying a sincere thank you and in wishing them and their families a happy and peaceful Christmas.
From the start of the pandemic, we committed to ensuring that councils had the resources they needed to step up and support their communities. We have provided councils with more than £7.2 billion of additional funding for covid-19 expenditure. We have ensured that councils receive support to manage associated losses in income, including from sales, fees, charges, leisure centres and local taxes, and that is expected to amount to further billions of pounds of support. That commitment remains undimmed, and the settlement we are announcing today ensures that councils have the resources they need to continue that work next year, to play their part in the recovery of their communities and to deliver first-class public services.
As we look ahead to 2021 and 2022, the annual settlement makes an extra £2.2 billion available to fund the provision of critical public services including adult and children’s social care. Within that, we are giving authorities access to an additional £1 billion for adult and children’s social care, made up of £300 million of social care grant and the flexibility of a 3% adult social care precept. On average, English councils will see a 4.5% cash-terms increase in core spending power, which is also an increase in real terms. That is testament to the support that our local government deserves, and it comes off the back of three settlements in a row that have increased funding in real terms.
The £1 billion grant announced at last year’s spending review will continue, along with all other existing social care funding. Balancing the contributions of national and local taxpayers, we are giving councils increased flexibility through a 2% council tax referendum limit, with an extra 3% for social care authorities. Councils will, of course, want to take into account the financial circumstances of their residents and to protect households from excessive increases in bills. It is incumbent on councils to balance these competing pressures and reach the right decision for their local areas.
To help councils continue reducing council tax for those least able to pay, including households hit hard financially by the pandemic, I am making £670 million of new grant funding available outside the core settlement for local council tax support. Lower tier councils, including districts, will benefit from a new one-off £111 million lower tier services grant, and we are providing certainty and stability by confirming that the main funding allocations for the full range of council services will rise in line with inflation.
Our settlement also addresses the extra costs incurred by councils in rural areas, providing an extra £4 million to the rural services delivery grant—the highest contribution to date, at £85 million. We are also proposing a further £622 million of new homes bonus allocations, We will invite views on how we can reform the scheme next year to ensure that it is focused where homes are needed the most and where councils are ambitious to get on and deliver them.
Despite the arrival of vaccines, we will continue to live with covid-19 for some months. That is why, alongside the core settlement, I am announcing comprehensive measures, including £1.55 billion of additional, unring-fenced grant funding for covid expenditure. Our measures insure against funding shortfalls, and I am particularly pleased to confirm today the scope of and approach to our very well received scheme to reimburse councils for 75% of irrecoverable lost tax income from 2020-21.
As the cold weather sets in, the protection of those sleeping rough amid the pandemic continues to be one of my priorities. Our world-leading Everyone In initiative was and remains a powerful testament to what local and central Government can achieve together. We are building on that work to ensure that as few of the 29,000 people who were helped off the streets under that scheme, and subsequently, return to life on the streets, spending over £750 million next year to tackle homelessness and rough sleeping—a 60% increase on the previous you spending review. In addition, we are providing £165 million of new funding to councils for the troubled families programme, underlining our continued commitment to the most vulnerable in society. Following the passage of the Domestic Abuse Bill, we will provide £125 million funding next year to enable councils to meet their duties in full to provide the support that victims of domestic abuse and their children undoubtedly deserve.
Serious challenges remain, but the start of the vaccine roll-out last week offers us cause for optimism and allows us to at least begin to glimpse the world beyond the pandemic. We want to work with local councils to build a new country beyond covid—a country that is more prosperous, greener, safer and more neighbourly. Local government will be integral to the achievement of that shared vision. We will establish a new £4 billion levelling-up fund, building on the success of our £3.6 billion towns and high streets funds. Any local area will be eligible to apply directly to this fund, which will finance the everyday infrastructure, town centre regeneration and culture that communities need and local people want. The UK shared prosperity fund will help to level up and create opportunity across the UK. A UK-wide investment framework for that will be published by my Department early next year.
The Government are funding vital local infrastructure, with total capital spending at £100 billion. That will fund once-in-a-generation changes to local communities and deliver the highest sustained levels of public sector net investment since the 1970s, including the biggest hospital building programme in living memory, and £2.2 billion investment in our schools funding programme to rebuild 500 schools over the next decade. In addition, local councils will benefit from £1.7 billion for local  roads maintenance and upgrades to tackle potholes, which will improve local connectivity and deliver better roads for our communities.
I want local government to emerge stronger, more sustainable and better able to meet the needs of those it serves. That means greater openness and accountability, and in a minority of cases it means better financial management and regard for taxpayers’ money. To that end, my Department is publishing today its response to Sir Tony Redmond’s excellent review of the effectiveness of external audit and transparency. We will provide councils with an additional £15 million next year to implement Sir Tony’s recommendations. We are preserving the ability of local authorities to invest in programmes to power growth by lowering Public Works Loan Board interest rates, but we must also protect taxpayers from unwise risky investments of the kind we have seen, sadly, in some councils in recent years. Those practices must now end.
When there is a clearer path ahead, we will work with the sector and Members across the House to seek a new consensus for broader reforms to local government, including the fair funding review and the business rates reset, and we will ensure that councils are set on a long-term trajectory of sustainable growth and fair resources.
This will, I hope, be viewed as a significant settlement that paves the way for a bright future for our local communities as they seek to bounce back from an exceptionally difficult year. The settlement will deliver £2.2 billion of extra funding, a 4.5% cash and real terms increase in core spending power, and it will further fund councils to ensure that they steer the course of the remaining months of the covid-19 pandemic with certainty and confidence. Building on last year’s settlement, which exceptionally received cross-party support, it puts councils, which were at the forefront of our response to the pandemic, at the forefront of our recovery, and I commend this statement to the House.

Steve Reed: I thank the Secretary of State for advance sight of his statement, and I echo his words of thanks to council staff for the sterling work they have carried out in the most daunting of circumstances. However, the Secretary of State’s announcement today leaves local authorities facing a vast funding gap that will inevitably lead to job losses, cuts in key frontline services, such as adult social care, and the closure of yet more treasured community assets such as libraries, youth centres and leisure centres.
Perhaps one of the most shocking aspects of the settlement is the Government’s plan to force councils to hike up council tax while the country still faces an unprecedented health crisis and the deepest recession for 300 years. The Government are proposing a council tax hike more than twice the rate of inflation. The Conservatives have decided to clobber hard-working families when their jobs and incomes are already under extreme pressure, and in return, those taxpayers will get fewer services.
Council tax is a regressive tax that hits families on average incomes harder than the wealthy. It also raises less money in poorer areas. A 5% increase in Surrey raises £38 million, while a 5% increase in Blackburn with Darwen raises just £2.8 million. An older person  living in a less wealthy area, such as one of the red wall seats, will see their Conservative MP tax them more but cut the care services they rely on.
In his first speech as Prime Minister, Boris Johnson stood on the steps of Downing Street and said he would
“fix the crisis in social care once and for all with a clear plan we have prepared”.
No one has seen a dot or comma of that plan in the 18 months since. Costs for social care are soaring, yet today’s settlement will make the crisis worse and will hit older people living in less affluent areas hardest.
In 2011, the average band D council tax was £1,439. With the Conservative council tax bombshell announced today, the average bill for next year will be £1,909. That is a rise of 33% under this Conservative Government. The message to the public is clear: “Pay more but get less under the Conservatives, with Rishi Sunak’s council tax hike coming your way in the middle of the worst recession for three centuries.”
Can the Secretary of State please tell us how he expects families to afford a 5% council tax hike in the middle of an unprecedented economic crisis? When can we expect to see the Government’s plan to fix the social care crisis instead of leaving older people struggling without the support they need? Given the urgency of the pandemic, how much are the Government increasing the public health grant next year, and what does the Secretary of State expect councils to do about the 25% lost council tax and business rate income that he is not compensating them for?

Robert Jenrick: I echo the hon. Gentleman’s thanks to local council workers across the country. He talks about our pledge to support local councils and to ensure that they are fully funded for the work that they have done during covid, and we have made good on that promise. We have provided £7.2 billion already. Local councils to date have reported that they have spent £4 billion and are projecting that they will spend almost £6.2 billion to the end of the year, so we will have provided local councils with as much, if not more, funding than they have reported.
The hon. Gentleman refers to funding for local council tax losses and for sales fees and charges. Our schemes are extremely generous in both regards, providing 75p in the pound of losses for local councils to ensure that they can weather the particular storm that they have been through this year. He refers to council tax costs. Local councils are not under any obligation to increase council taxes. We only have to look back at the record of the last Labour Government to see what happens under Labour. Under Labour, council tax doubled. Under this Conservative Government, council tax is lower in real terms today than it was in 2010-11.
It is difficult to see how the hon. Gentleman and his colleagues can pose as the guardians of taxpayer value. I appreciate that he is on what we might call a sticky wicket in this regard. We only have to look at his local Labour council in Croydon. It purchased a hotel above the asking price, which has now gone bankrupt. It created a housing company with a £200 million loan and it could not say whether it had built any houses. The cabinet has been described as acting like some kind of wrecking ball, except that the wrecking ball was directed at its own council. Or, indeed, we could look at Nottingham’s Labour council, which was described recently  by its auditors as having “institutional blindness” to its financial mismanagement and ineptitude, which included creating an energy company called Robin Hood. That is a rather unusual definition of Robin Hood’s activities—instead of taking from the rich, it robbed off everyone.
The truth is that under Labour councils, it is the public who lose out. The public will pay the price in Croydon in lost jobs, poorer services and, ultimately, higher council taxes. We will continue to support local councils, the overwhelming majority of which, of all political persuasions, have done a sterling job this year, and we will ensure that they get the resources they need to continue that work into the new year.

Bob Blackman: In these exceptional times, we have another single-year statement—or single-year funding—and I am sure my right hon. Friend will wish to return to multi-year funding as soon as practically possible. I welcome the £8 billion that has been given in additional funding this year alone to councils to support them in the pandemic and the commitment to more than £3 billion for next year. Obviously a number of areas, particularly in London and the south-east, have gone into tier 3, which does mean additional costs and forgoing income that local authorities will need to try to balance their books not only in this current financial year but going into the next year. Will my right hon. Friend confirm what additional support will be available to local leaders in the areas that are facing the highest restrictions under covid-19?

Robert Jenrick: My hon. Friend makes an important point, and I share his desire to have a multi-year settlement for local government.Obviously, this year has proved a unique one, in which the kaleidoscope has been shaken in many respects and will take time to settle. I hope that when we come to do the settlement next year it will indeed be a multi-year one. I believe that that is the expectation of my right hon. Friend the Chancellor, but he will no doubt give confirmation in due course, as we see how 2021 turns out.
On local councils in tier 3, we are providing further funding for both councils themselves and their local business community, on a month-by-month basis, if they are in tier 2 or tier 3. The purpose of today’s settlement, in looking ahead to the likely covid expenditure that councils will face next year, is to ensure that both in respect of the month-by-month costs that councils are incurring, which have been about £500 million a month, and the losses they are incurring in sales, fees and charges, they at least have forward guidance to the middle point of the next calendar year. Of course we all hope that by Easter, and certainly by the summer, the position in the country and within councils will be dramatically different.

Clive Betts: On behalf of the Select Committee, may I join both Front Benchers in thanking councils up and down the country for the brilliant job they have done in keeping services going and communities safe in the past few terrible months? The Government are forecasting a 4.5% increase in spending power for local authorities, and the assumption there is that councils will put up council tax by 5%, including the 3% for social care, all in one year. Although councils have the discretion to decide on that, will he confirm  that the spending power in his statement assumes that all councils will put their council tax up by 5%? There is a forecast in here about ongoing covid costs. Does he accept that those costs might be greater? If they are, on an unforeseen basis, will the Government stand ready to provide extra money for councils if they can show that their costs are in excess of what the Government are so far calculating?

Robert Jenrick: I thank the Chair of the Select Committee for all his work and that of his Committee over the year. He is right to say that the figures we quote of an up to 4.5% real-terms cash increase in core spending power are dependent on the choices that local councils make in the weeks and months ahead, but one would expect that; local councils and the local democratic process will have to balance up the competing interests of providing public services and ensuring that hard-working people are not facing excessive increases in local council tax, and those will be different judgments in different parts of the country.
I will of course keep the covid costs being incurred by local councils under review. We have made good on our promises time and again since the start of the pandemic. Early in the pandemic, the Local Government Association came before the hon. Gentleman’s Committee and estimated that costs incurred by local councils would be around £10 billion. We are going to end this financial year having provided local councils with, I suspect, about £10 billion, and we are providing further billions of pounds into next year. So we can see the Government’s commitment and determination to support local councils.

Bob Seely: First, I wish to thank the Minister for his decision on the housing algorithm, the statement today, and the very significant work that he, his Ministers, the Department and indeed the Isle of Wight Council has done during the pandemic, which has been vital. In the fair funding review, the Government for the first time recognised the additional cost of providing public services on the Isle of Wight— in effect, they recognised the Island as an island, and I am grateful for that. For understandable reasons, due to the covid pandemic, the review was put on hold. Does he accept that this delay has prevented Isle of Wight Council, despite its undoubted best efforts, from supporting Islanders to the same extent that mainland councils can support their residents? Finally, will he meet me and my local council to discuss funding these additional costs, as part of a consultation process and prior to the local government financial settlement for 2021-22?

Robert Jenrick: I would be happy to meet my hon. Friend and the leader of his local council, as would, I am sure, the Minister for Regional Growth and Local Government, my hon. Friend the Member for Thornbury and Yate (Luke Hall). I do not agree that the Isle of Wight has lacked the resources to respond to the pandemic; from what I have seen it has done a sterling job. The Isle of Wight has had significant amounts of additional support, and total covid-19 funding for the council so far has been £20.3 million. We have also provided support for the local business community amounting to £48 million, which has been brilliantly dispensed by my hon. Friend’s local council, supporting 4,500 small and medium-sized businesses on the Isle of Wight. I am  pleased that my hon. Friend supports yesterday’s announcement on the local housing need question and that he will get on and build more homes on the Isle of Wight in the years ahead.

Stephen Timms: Will the additional funding that the Secretary of State has announced for homelessness ensure that councils can continue to put a roof over the heads of people with no recourse to public funds? The local authorities that gave evidence to the Work and Pensions Committee last week welcomed the Government’s winter support package for hard-pressed families, but it runs only until March. Does the Secretary of State have longer-term plans for how councils can support vulnerable households, so that councils can make their plans for the future?

Robert Jenrick: The right hon. Gentleman has a long-standing interest in this issue. It important that we set out long-term plans both to help the cohort of people who came in off the streets through Everybody In and to make further strides in our overall effort to reduce rough sleeping to the absolute minimum. In the summer we asked local councils, including the right hon. Gentleman’s, to draw up a plan for how they would assist those people who were in temporary accommodation into move-on accommodation, and then ultimately into either social housing or the private rental sector. We supported that with almost £100 million of funding.
The settlement announced today provides further funding for the next financial year that is the same as or greater than the amount of money that was available in this financial year, and it will be £750 million in total. We have also secured £430 million for new move-on accommodation and asked every local council in the country to bid for that so that they can invest in accommodation to help to support the people they have taken in off the streets.
On no recourse to public funds, we have taken a number of steps this year. We extended the derogation, not just to London but to the whole country, so that local councils can support European economic area nationals. There is of course, a cohort of people who are not EEA nationals, and we have allowed councils the discretion to support them when there is a risk to life. Many councils have chosen to do that throughout the pandemic and I am sure will do so this winter.

Lucy Allan: I thank my right hon. Friend for his statement and for the generous support that my local council has received during the pandemic. In particular, I wish to mention the £1 million rough sleepers fund and the £600,000 winter grant fund that we have received to support struggling families at this very difficult time. My local council staff have been doing a fantastic job, and my right hon. Friend is right to thank them for going above and beyond to serve our community.
My constituents are being told that in future they should expect council tax increases of 5% and that they should also expect to see cuts to vital services. Will my right hon. Friend please reassure my constituents that the generous funding settlement announced today, together with all the other measures, will mean that there will be no need for the council to choose to take such draconian measures as increasing council tax by 5% or making cuts to vital services?

Robert Jenrick: I am happy to reassure my hon. Friend’s constituents in Telford that there should be no reason why her local council, Telford and Wrekin, should endanger local people’s services. We have provided Telford and Wrekin Council with £22.5 million of covid-19 funding this year, and we have provided £30 million for local businesses, supporting 2,500 businesses in my hon. Friend’s constituency. Of course, Telford is in the running for the towns fund and I have been to visit some of the fantastic proposals that my hon. Friend is championing in that respect. Earlier in the year we provided £1 million of accelerated funding, which I think has gone towards the brilliant bridge linking Telford railway station with the town centre and the new tech zone being created there, which will create good-quality, high-skilled jobs for the future. The Getting Building fund has provided £15 million to the marches so that Shropshire and Herefordshire can get building and create and sustain jobs.

Jeremy Corbyn: The reality of this statement is that the Minister has thanked local authorities for all the good work they have done during the covid crisis, and they can look forward to cuts in services and the loss of jobs next year. I have a specific question on housing. He did not really reply to the question from my right hon. Friend the Member for East Ham (Stephen Timms) on those with no recourse to public funds. Can he guarantee that the funding available to local authorities now to house all rough sleepers will become a permanent feature of Government policy and that instead of just saying that they should provide move-on accommodation, the Government will ensure that local authorities can build the social housing—the council housing—that is so necessary to deal with the housing crisis that affects every part of this country? Lastly, in his role as Secretary of State for Housing, will he introduce legislation to give greater security to those living in private rented accommodation, who are at the moment going through such stress through the fear of losing their home when the protections are lifted at the end of this coronavirus crisis? We need to give people security in affordable housing in the future in this country.

Robert Jenrick: I forgot to say in response to the shadow Minister that of course the first and most celebrated customer of Robin Hood Energy in Nottingham was the right hon. Gentleman, the former Leader of the Opposition. On his questions, I can absolutely answer that this Government are committed to ending rough sleeping and we can see from the 60% increase in funding in this settlement versus the last spending review the degree of resources that we are willing to put into this issue. It is not solely about money; it is also a crisis of health. There are issues to do with ex-offenders, law enforcement and immigration. We are doing everything we can, and I am working with my Cabinet colleagues to progress this issue. We are investing that £433 million into new, good-quality move-on accommodation , including in London, working with the GLA and local councils, including his own, as well as pan-London organisations such as Peabody to get that accommodation up and running by the end of this year. He asks about housing more generally, and I want to see more houses built in London as much as he does. He could go to his own council in Islington and ask it to do more. Its current local housing need is for 2,300 homes, and it is building  on average 1,000, so less than half the amount of homes needed. Charity starts at home, and I suggest he goes to Islington and gets the council building to support the local community.

Peter Aldous: I thank my right hon. Friend for his statement. As chairman of the county all-party parliamentary group, I welcome his confirming a settlement that provides additional funding to provide stability for council finances next year. The county APPG has long campaigned for a more equitable methodology for distributing council funding that will promote levelling up and benefit not only historically underfunded counties such as Suffolk but metropolitan areas. I thus welcome the Secretary of State’s commitment to fair funding, but can he provide further details of when the Government will bring forward such proposals for consultation?

Robert Jenrick: We all—certainly those of us on the Government Benches—would agree that we need an updated and fairer method for distributing public funds within local government. This year would have been the wrong time to bring that forward, I think. This is a one-year settlement in a period of almost unique instability in the sector. There might be an opportunity to do it next year, and my Department will work with the Treasury to review that. In the meantime, we have substantially increased the rural services delivery grant, taking that to £85 million, the highest amount to date, to support the delivery of public service in places such as Suffolk, where it is undoubtedly challenging and expensive.

Gareth Bacon: I thank my right hon. Friend for the generous settlement he has secured for 2021-22. My Orpington constituency is part of the London Borough of Bromley, which, like other local authorities, faces significant uncertainty about funding from 2022-23 onwards, dealing with rising demands and the new normal following the covid situation. This year, the NHS will receive a multi-year settlement. When can a commitment be made by the Government to provide three or four-year financial settlements, which will be crucial in providing value for money for residents and service users, for local government into the future?

Robert Jenrick: As I have said in response to other questions, it would clearly be beneficial for the sector for there to be a multi-year settlement. This was not the opportunity to do so. I do not think that this would have been the right time when there is so much instability and uncertainty surrounding the delivery of public services by local councils. Perhaps next year—I will certainly be making representations to the Chancellor to encourage him to do so.

Wendy Chamberlain: The Secretary of State has said that it is not the right time to pursue wholesale reform of local government finance, which will be a relief to many local authorities across England. However, the threat of the reform will hang over the heads of those authorities as they work to recover from the financial difficulties of the pandemic and longer-term budget cuts. Will the Secretary of State confirm when he plans the reform to take place?

Robert Jenrick: I am not able to confirm when we will bring that forward. As I have said, it will not be on this occasion, but we will have to make a judgment, as to the  position of local government, whether next year would be right for, as she says, an undoubtedly significant change.

Alicia Kearns: The rural services delivery grant helps local authorities in rural areas such as Rutland and Melton to provide vital local services and, under this Government, it is the highest that it has ever been. Can my right hon. Friend confirm his intention to maintain this rural services delivery grant next year, and will he incorporate those principles into the fairer funding review, which is vital for rural authorities and communities such as mine to get their fair share?

Robert Jenrick: I shall certainly take my hon. Friend’s representations forward. I know that Leicestershire colleagues, both in local government and in the House, have long advocated a fairer distribution of public funds in local government. As I have said in answer to other questions, we will take careful consideration of that next year.

Mohammad Yasin: Covid-19 costs are expected to leave Bedford Borough Council with a funding gap of nearly £22 million by 2021-22. One councillor described the lack of a fair funding settlement as, “the Government expecting councils to set balanced budgets with both hands tied behind their backs while wearing a blindfold.” When will the Secretary of State realise that, to finally beat the pandemic and keep local economies going, the Government need to fund local authorities properly as promised?

Robert Jenrick: It would not be right for me to say in public the self-reported estimate of costs provided to us by Bedford Borough Council because that has been done in confidence. None the less, across the whole country, as I have said, the sum of money that we have provided to local councils well exceeds their self-reported covid-19 expenditure. With respect to Bedford, I can say that the total funding provided this year has been £20.9 million so far. For Bedford’s businesses, we have provided £27.8 million, supporting 2,300 businesses. Looking to the future and the recovery of Bedford’s economy, it is likely to be a recipient of the towns fund, and it certainly has received £1 million in accelerated funding to support new infrastructure, skills, culture and business development.

Steve Double: May I welcome my right hon. Friend’s commitment to maintain the rural services delivery grant, which is so important in recognising the additional costs that rural councils face? Many of these councils have also seen a significant drop in income due to loss of revenue through things such as car parks and other services. Will he lay out what steps he will take to support these councils that have lost significant income during this year?

Robert Jenrick: I appreciate that this will have been a particular challenge to Cornwall Council with its array of car parks and other attractions for the tourist sector. That is why we created the sales fees and charges scheme earlier in the year, which provides 75p in the   pound to councils for losses in that regard. Already, we have paid out, I think, more than £500 million to local councils. I am sure that Cornwall Council has already benefited and will do so in the future and it is expected that that scheme will provide over £1 billion, if not significantly more. It is without cap, and we have announced in the settlement today that we will be rolling that forward to the middle point of next year. Cornwall Council will be able to rely on that to plan its future to the summer of next year, and, of course, we all hope that people will be in Cornwall enjoying its beaches and attractions in the summer of 2021.

Olivia Blake: I am concerned that the revised housing targets will cause a north-south divide on green-belt building. These new targets could lead to a 35% increase for Sheffield. Will the Secretary of State confirm that, following the very successful consultation with the community in Sheffield to limit green-belt building, the new target will not be imposed on Sheffield? Instead of levelling up, is it his plan to level our glorious northern green belt?

Robert Jenrick: The hon. Lady makes an interesting argument, because we on the Government Benches want to see more private sector investment going into the great cities of the midlands and the north. We want to see more homes, more urban regeneration, and more brilliant and inspired schemes coming to constituencies such as hers. That is exactly the approach we have taken with respect to the local housing need, and I respectfully ask her to show a little bit more ambition for her community. The three-year annual delivery of homes in Sheffield is 2,500 homes; the new local housing need that we have proposed is 2,800 homes, so if the hon. Lady truly believes that 300 extra homes could not be built in a great city such as Sheffield, then I think she is talking it down, which I am sure is not her intention. However, through your auspices, Madam Deputy Speaker, can I offer her and, particularly, her mother—who has done a fantastic job leading her city over a very challenging year—a very happy Christmas?

Ben Spencer: I thank my right hon. Friend for this much-needed further financial support for our local authorities, which lead the local response to covid. Local government staff in Runnymede and Elmbridge borough councils and Surrey County Council have worked tirelessly this year to provide essential services to my constituents, and will continue to do so over Christmas and the new year break and beyond. With Runnymede and Weybridge now entering tier 3 restrictions, will my right hon. Friend join me in thanking those staff for their efforts, and agree that we must continue to support our local authorities and the fantastic work they do for our communities?

Robert Jenrick: I would be delighted to join my hon. Friend in thanking the brilliant staff at his local councils. I have been consistently delighted and impressed by the fantastic work that staff at local councils have done across the country, including my own in Newark and Sherwood, Rushcliffe and Bassetlaw, and Nottinghamshire County Council. I am sure that all of us in the House want to join together to thank them and wish them a healthy and peaceful Christmas.

Bambos Charalambous: While I welcome any funding for local government, it is not enough. Enfield Council has had £193 million of cuts to funding since 2010. It has had to spend £64 million in dealing with the covid-19 emergency, yet has only received less than half of that from the Government, and it has not been receiving its fair share of public health funding since 2013, receiving half of what neighbouring boroughs get. When will the Government level up for Enfield and give it the proper funding it deserves?

Robert Jenrick: As Secretary of State for local government, I am familiar with people saying that there is not enough money; that, I think, is a refrain that all of my predecessors of all parties have known. However, I do not think it is fair with respect to Enfield this year. We have provided it with £43.6 million of covid-19 funding so far. We have provided it with £44 million for its local business community, and the settlement that we are setting out today provides a further £12.5 million, taking Enfield’s core spending power to a quarter of a billion pounds. That will be a 5.3% increase—a very substantial increase—for the benefit of the hon. Gentleman’s council and his constituents.

Scott Benton: At the start of this pandemic, the Government stated that they would provide local authorities with all the support they needed to get through these challenging times. The total amount of additional Government support that Blackpool Council has received since March to support local services and businesses now stands at over £129 million, and my council’s finance officers can scarcely believe that the position is so healthy at this stage. In spite of this, the temptation of many Labour-run councils, including my own, will be to go for a hefty council tax increase next year. Will my right hon. Friend join me in urging those councils to demonstrate restraint, and to make sure we consider how to get value for money from local services?

Robert Jenrick: My hon. Friend makes a very important point, and I am very happy to give him my full support. When providing public services, local councils will need to balance their individual financial positions with the needs of their own constituents and residents—hard-working people whose incomes will be under pressure.
With respect to Blackpool Council, as my hon. Friend says, we provided it with an exceptional degree of support over the course of this year. Its core spending power is £148 million, so the sum that he quotes is very significant in that context. Some £26 billion has gone to pay for that council’s covid-19 expenditure, and it is also, of course, the recipient of our first towns fund town deal, amounting to £39.5 million of investment into Blackpool. That will, I think, go in part to ensure that the Blackpool illuminations are back and brighter than ever next year.

Clive Efford: Council tax increases have become a stealth tax for this Government. Council tax now makes up 60% of core spending in local authorities—up from 49% just five years ago. Does the Secretary of State acknowledge that raising council tax year on year, as this Government have done, without recognising deprivation levels is, far from levelling up, leaving local authorities with high deprivation, such as mine in Greenwich, further and further behind?

Robert Jenrick: As I said in answer to the shadow Minister’s remarks, the Government have seen a real-terms decrease in council tax compared with the position when we came to power in 2010. It was the last Labour Government that doubled council tax bills for residents throughout the country. Of course we are aware of the different tax bases of different local authorities and that is why we have consistently provided grants to ensure that there is equalisation across the country. In this settlement, we are providing £270 million of equalisation grants to ensure that each part of the country, regardless of how wealthy or otherwise it may be, has the resources it needs to properly fund adult and children’s social care and all the other important public services.

Bob Neill: The additional funding for local authorities like Bromley is very welcome and I also welcome my right hon. Friend’s desire to move back to multi-year settlements as soon as possible. However, for those of us whose councils have social services responsibilities, the ongoing upward pressure of adult social care costs is perhaps the single biggest cause of financial uncertainty. There was talk and a promise of a social care Green Paper as far back as 2018, but we have not seen it yet. When will we tackle the difficult but essential task of reforming social care funding? Without that, it will be difficult to find a sustainable financial base for our authorities with those responsibilities.

Robert Jenrick: My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care will bring forward proposals in due course. We will meet our manifesto commitment to introduce the long-term reforms that this country urgently needs on social care. I think today’s settlement provides local government with the sustainable finances it needs for social care. It has been widely praised by the sector as meeting the demographic changes that my right hon. Friend mentioned. We are also ensuring that councils such as his have the funding that they need. Bromley will have a 5.5% increase in core spending power from the previous year, in which there was a 4.7% increase. That is two successive years of increases in council funding for his local authority area.
Briefly, in other news for my right hon. Friend, today we have announced funding for waking watches, partly inspired by brilliant campaigners in his constituency.

Kevan Jones: I add my thanks to council staff and councillors for their work during this last year, particularly those at Durham County Council. I particularly thank the chief executive, Terry Collins, who is retiring at the end of the year after 43 years in local government.
The Secretary of State’s announcement is mainly made up of local council tax increases in core spending. Durham County Council has 50% of its council tax properties in band A, which limits its ability to raise large amounts of council tax compared with councils in the south, which have larger numbers of higher band council tax properties. That will mean that Durham County Council has no option but to increase its council tax to the maximum. The Secretary of State and the Government talk about levelling up, but today he is clearly punishing northern council tax payers while rewarding southern council tax payers.

Robert Jenrick: I join the right hon. Gentleman in thanking and praising the staff of his local council and wishing Mr Collins a happy retirement. With respect to the balance of funding across the country, I am afraid that the right hon. Gentleman is mistaken. This settlement will ensure that funding is there for all councils in all parts of the country. We have taken particular care to address the issue that he raises. In fact, County Durham will receive £5.2 million in equalisation payments. That will ensure that it has a 4.5% cash and real-terms increase in core spending power, which comes on top of a 7% increase last year—very substantial increases to ensure that his constituents get good-quality public services.

Andy Carter: I welcome my right hon. Friend’s statement, and particularly the review of the effectiveness of local authority external audits. Warrington Borough Council’s accounts dating back to 2017-18 still have not been signed off. Given the recent news from Croydon Council, which was effectively declared bankrupt when it issued a section 114 notice last month, does he share my concerns about Labour-controlled Warrington Council, which has debt of around £1.6 billion? Similarly to Croydon, it has used the funds to purchase a shopping centre, offices, a bank and—guess what?—an energy company. Does he agree that it is time for a Government inquiry into the level of council borrowing, which puts local services at risk and loads huge debt on to council tax payers such as my constituents in Warrington South?

Robert Jenrick: My hon. Friend makes a very important point. We all want to see councils have access to funding at low interest rates to fund housing and regeneration within their own boundaries. We do not expect local councils to indulge in risky financial ventures, either within their own area or beyond. That is a mistake. Many local councils quite clearly do not have the financial management skills to do that. My hon. Friend highlights at least two egregious examples of that, in Nottingham and Croydon. Warrington may well be another; I will look it up myself after this statement. We need to bear down on those councils that appear to be using taxpayers’ money as if it were Monopoly money and respect the individuals who actually pay the bills at the end of the day.

Chris Matheson: We get the usual fundamental dishonesty in the Government’s position: they herald an increase in spending power, but that is entirely predicated on increases in council tax, and when those increases are made, they attack councils politically for having made those increases. Can we just have a bit of honesty from the Government about the position they are driving councils to? Cheshire West and Chester has coped very well with the coronavirus pandemic, but we are still £1 million in the red. Will the Government support us with that debt?

Robert Jenrick: I will happily look into the issue that the hon. Gentleman raises, but £1 million is not a great deal of money in the context of the £39.8 million that the Government have provided to Cheshire West and Chester Council to meet its covid-19 expenditure. If that is correct, it rather suggests that we have made good on our promise to ensure that that council, like every other, gets the resources it needs. In case the hon.  Gentleman would like to know, the settlement for next year for Cheshire West and Chester ensures a 4.1% cash and real-terms increase in core spending power, which builds on a 6% increase last year.

Alberto Costa: Conservative-led Blaby District Council is one of the best-run councils in our country. Conservative council leader Terry Richardson asked me today how the Government will compensate councils such as Blaby for the loss of the new homes bonus. For context, that is a loss to Blaby District Council of more than £1 million. If the Secretary of State does not have the answer to that specific point, will he undertake to write to me with a specific response on the data that Blaby has to work on?

Robert Jenrick: I will happily write to my hon. Friend with the full details with respect to Blaby District Council. Across the country, we have announced today that we will be doing a further year of the new homes bonus, backed by over £600 million of Government money, but we will also be consulting on the future of the new homes bonus. The new homes bonus is an important part of the finances of many local councils, but it is widely perceived to be a poor incentive for councils to get on and build homes, so the consultation will ask how we can develop a new incentive that supports those councils that need to build homes and those that have high ambitions to get on and build. Fortunately for my hon. Friend, his council and those that surround it in Leicestershire are among the most ambitious councils in the country when it comes to house building.

Debbie Abrahams: Like others, I am very concerned that the increase in local authority budgets is largely predicated on an assumption of a rise in council tax and the social care precept. This tax is highly inappropriate in the current circumstances and fails to recognise the different needs of local economies such as mine in Oldham and Saddleworth. To be frank, it is just not good enough for the Secretary of State to say that it is up to local authorities what they do. When is he going to reimburse Oldham Council for its covid-associated deficit, forecast at more than £10 million in 2021-22? What will he do to fulfil the Conservative manifesto pledge to level up regarding council funding, given the disproportionate cuts that northern local authorities have faced over the last 10 years?

Robert Jenrick: As I said in answer to the hon. Member for Bedford (Mohammad Yasin), it would not be right for me to say publicly how much a local council has self-reported as having spent on covid-19 expenditure, but across the whole country, we have more than compensated local councils for the costs they have incurred. We have provided Oldham with £33.5 million so far. In addition, it will be making use of the sales, fees and charges scheme, which provides 75p in the pound, and the council tax and business rates scheme that we have announced today, which does the same thing, so I rather suspect that Oldham will receive as much money as it requires over the course of the year. The hon. Lady did not welcome the fact that Oldham is part of the towns fund—I look forward to seeing the proposals that it brings forward—or that we provided £1 million to Oldham earlier in the year, so that it can get on and take forward some of those exciting ideas as soon as possible.

Felicity Buchan: I thank my right hon. Friend for all the support that my council has received during coronavirus. One issue that my council faces is that we raise an awful lot in business rates, given the high property values in Kensington. We get very little of that back, yet our high streets are really suffering because of the crippling level of business rates. Does he agree that we need a fundamental review of business rates?

Robert Jenrick: I join my hon. Friend in praising her local council, and in particular the excellent local council leader she is lucky to have, Elizabeth Campbell, whom it has been my pleasure to work with this year on many different issues.
My hon. Friend is right to say that business rates are a challenge. Of course, this year the Chancellor has provided a business rates holiday, which so many businesses on our local high streets have benefited from. It will be for him to decide whether or in what form that should continue into the next financial year, and no doubt he will bring forward further details on that next year. There will be a fundamental review of the future of business rates, and I am sure she will contribute to that in due course.

Lyn Brown: Merry Christmas, Madam Deputy Speaker. As the Secretary of State knows full well, Newham has the highest level of homelessness in the country and the second worst level of child poverty in the country, and more than half of Newham residents are either on furlough or out of work. The crisis is getting worse. Our food banks have never known times this bad, and despite fantastic work by local charities, many of our children will be going without this Christmas. Our council has suffered drastic cuts over the past 10 years and has even been underfunded for covid impacts by about £20 million. Can he assure me that the settlement will right that wrong, and if not, will he meet me and my right hon. Friend the Member for East Ham (Stephen Timms) to discuss?

Robert Jenrick: I certainly can give the hon. Member that assurance, but equally, I would be more than happy to meet her and her right hon. Friend. She raises a number of different points. Her local council has received a great deal of money from the Government over the course of this year. It has received almost £50 million in covid-19 expenditure alone so far, in addition to the schemes I have already referred to, which will no doubt amount to many further millions of pounds. The Government have provided the council with £56 million to support 4,000 of her local businesses. She also mentions homelessness and rough sleeping, on which we have worked very closely with Newham Council—I visited a brilliant move-on accommodation site in her constituency earlier this year with the mayor—and we will be providing it with further funding next year, thanks to the £750 million that we are investing in our campaign to end rough sleeping.

Robert Halfon: Madam Deputy Speaker, may I wish you, as my brilliant constituency neighbour across the border in Epping Forest, a happy Christmas?
My right hon. Friend knows that we are in the process of bidding for the £25 million towns fund to regenerate Harlow. Coupled with the recently announced  £50 million Harlow investment fund, does he agree that this regeneration money will completely transform our town to build an even better Harlow? Does he also agree that these regeneration funds are all the more important given the struggle that local businesses and shopkeepers have had to face because of the coronavirus pandemic, and will he confirm that every possible financial support will be given to the residents of Harlow to help us through this pandemic?

Robert Jenrick: Can I thank my right hon. Friend for his hard work over the course of this year and for the campaigns we have worked on together? Not least of those is the decision he campaigned on for many years to institute national space standards for new homes built under permitted development rights, which I think will make a great deal of difference in Harlow, as across the country. He is right to highlight the many ways in which the Government are supporting Harlow—through the towns fund, which is bringing forward very exciting and welcome proposals, and also through the work of Homes England in my Department, which is putting £240 million against the new garden village to provide much-needed housing and further town centre regeneration for his local community. I look forward to visiting Harlow, I am sure, next year and seeing the results.

John Cryer: Would the Secretary of State look again at suspending, even if temporarily, the no recourse to public funds rule? He mentioned a number of groups who have been removed from that rule. I still deal with constituents day in and day out who have that rule inflicted upon them, and of course many are on zero-hours contracts, which means their work disappears literally overnight.

Robert Jenrick: I am very alive to this issue. The Government’s position has not changed and the law remains as it has been, but as I said in answer to a previous question, we have done two things this year that are significant: first, extending the derogation, which enables councils to support EEA nationals in this country who find themselves on the streets, and also allowing councils to use the discretion they have under the law to support those where there is a risk to life. Many councils, I suspect the hon. Member’s among them, have used that discretion to support vulnerable rough sleepers who do not have recourse to public funds during the virus. Many of the 29,000 individuals we brought in off the streets under Everyone In were people who lacked recourse to public funds, and those people are by and large being supported by councils to this day.

Nigel Mills: I thank the Secretary of State for his statement, and for his announcement a couple of days ago about support for councils with outsourced leisure centres. Even with that income Amber Valley Borough Council’s finances are in a pretty terrible state. Does he believe that the two-tier council system will survive this crisis, and will he be encouraging areas to work out how upper and lower-tier councils can work together more closely to save money?

Robert Jenrick: Earlier in the year, I laid a written ministerial statement that set out the Government’s position with respect to local government reorganisation.  It remains my view that, where there is local support, councils should consider further reorganisation to drive the sorts of efficiencies my hon. Friend speaks of, but there must be support for that within the local community. It is not the Government’s intention to impose that on parts of the country where it does not work for the character and nature of local government. We have taken forward three propositions—one in Cumbria, one in Somerset and one in North Yorkshire. Bids for those have been submitted to me, and my hon. Friend the Minister for Regional Growth and Local Government and I will be making decisions on that early in the new year.

Steve McCabe: Public health teams have been a key part of the response to the covid crisis, but the King’s Fund reports that the public health grant settlement last year was 22% lower per head than it was for 2015-16. How does the Secretary of State plan to address that?

Robert Jenrick: We have provided exceptional resources both to the NHS and to local authorities over the course of the year, so the suggestion that public health has not been resourced this year is not correct. We have been providing huge sums of money to support the increasingly important role of directors of public health in local councils and the teams that are around them. With respect to Birmingham, we have provided £177 million of covid-19 expenditure funding already, much of which will have gone to support the sort of work that the hon. Gentleman is talking about, including through the infection control programmes.

Nicholas Fletcher: I thank the Minister for providing his statement today. May I ask him to inform the House how local authorities such as Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council can continue to benefit from local settlement schemes? Furthermore, what steps is his Department taking to encourage local councils such as DMBC to ensure that they bid for funding in a timely manner and spend money in an equitable way?

Robert Jenrick: The resettlement programme is resuming early in the new year after an understandable pause as a result of covid-19, and we will ensure that it is properly resourced so that it can continue to fulfil its important function. With respect to local councils, it is important that they apply for the funds that are made available to them. We have produced a number of schemes over the last couple of years, including the towns fund and the high streets fund. Next year, we will be bringing forward the £4 billion levelling-up fund, and it is my intention that we make the application and competition procedures as simple as possible so that local councils can succeed. My hon. Friend has a good council in his constituency, and I have worked closely with Damian Allen, its excellent chief executive. It has benefited from the towns fund on two occasions, and I hope to support it in future.

Liz Twist: I want to start by thanking all the staff at Gateshead Council, who have done an absolutely magnificent job in responding to the pandemic and being hugely flexible, so thanks to them. I also want to return to the theme of public health that my hon.  Friend the Member for Birmingham, Selly Oak (Steve McCabe) raised, because this year more than any other has shown the importance of public health services. They have been vital in helping to limit the spread of covid-19 and responding to the pandemic. We know that the pandemic has exposed the impact of health inequalities on those who contract covid-19 and on their response to it, yet there is nothing in the statement about public health. Can the Secretary of State tell the House what conversations he has had with Cabinet colleagues about public health funding for next year?

Robert Jenrick: The question that the hon. Lady asks is primarily for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, but what I would say, building on my remarks of a few moments ago, is that public health has been significantly invested in over the course of this year as a result of the covid-19 pandemic. The public health grant provided to local councils has to be viewed in the round, including the sums of money that we have been providing to directors of public health for infection control, for personal protective equipment and for support for care homes across the country, including in her own local council, which has received £28 million of covid-19 expenditure already.

Kate Griffiths: I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for the continued generous financial support offered to our local authorities. Burton has recently submitted its town investment plan, which is a joined-up plan to renew our high street, expand sustainable travel and enhance the skills of our young people. Will my right hon. Friend grant us our £25 million Christmas wish, which would truly level up Burton for the future?

Robert Jenrick: I look forward to receiving the proposals for my hon. Friend’s towns fund bid. We will be making further announcements on that early next year, and nothing would give me greater pleasure than to support the towns in her constituency.

Florence Eshalomi: I want to ask the Secretary of State about funding for our hard-working firefighters, including the London Fire Brigade. They have seen a 38% cut in central Government funding since 2010 and 11,200 fewer firefighters during the same period. The workload for our firefighters continues to increase as they are now expected to monitor and keep safe a built environment with previously unidentified risk, inspecting over 8,000 high rises, including many in my Vauxhall constituency. So is it fair that the Government are forcing the LFB and other fire authorities to shoulder these costs?

Robert Jenrick: I think the hon. Lady’s question is better directed to the Minister with responsibility for the fire service, who laid a written ministerial statement earlier today specifically with respect to the police and fire settlements. More broadly, I join her in thanking fire and rescue services across the country for the fantastic work they do day in, day out and have done throughout the pandemic, and the work they are doing with my Department with respect to building safety issues.
I heard the hon. Lady’s question earlier to my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House with respect to waking watch. She might like to know that earlier today we announced a £30 million fund, which will be available  to any building faced with egregious waking watch costs, so they can pay for fire alarm systems to be installed. That should bring those costs to an end, or at the very least significantly reduce them, and be the beginning of the end of terrible rip-off practices that have put huge stress and anxiety on to leaseholders.
Virtual participation in proceedings concluded (Order, 4 June).

Points of Order

Kate Green: On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. Have you received any indication from the Secretary of State for Education on when his statement regarding pupils’ return to school in January and the roll-out of mass testing in schools will be put before this House? Last night we saw contradictory briefings to the media. Today, the Health Secretary in this Chamber and the permanent secretary to the Department for Education at her appearance before the Public Accounts Committee said there would be an announcement, but there is still no clarity.
Pupils are due to break up for the Christmas holidays tonight, if they have not already done so. Tomorrow is to be an inset day. Parents, teachers and school staff need to know what is going to happen in January and what support they will receive to make it happen. They deserve better from this incompetent Government. Do you know, Madam Deputy Speaker, when and whether we may expect a statement on the matter from the Secretary of State for Education?

Rosie Winterton: I am grateful to the hon. Lady for her point of order and for giving me advance notice of her intention to raise the matter. If a Minister wished to make a statement, had notified Mr Speaker accordingly and a statement was to be made, the House would have been informed. As she knows, Mr Speaker is very anxious that statements are made first to the House and not to the media. I am sure that those on the Treasury Bench will have noted her concerns and will convey them back to the relevant Department.

Kevan Jones: Further to that point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. The Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, in his response to my hon. Friend the Member for Manchester, Withington (Jeff Smith), was very clear that the Secretary of State for Education is to make an announcement on schools. I have been inundated—I am sure many other right hon. and hon. Members have been, too—with emails, letters and correspondence from parents and teachers concerned about what is happening in schools. I know Mr Speaker is very clear that statements should be made here and not outside. I therefore wonder whether, through you, Madam Deputy Speaker, Mr Speaker could this afternoon inquire at the Department for Education whether or not a statement is going to be made to the House this afternoon, because this is causing great anxiety among our constituents.

Rosie Winterton: There is very little I can add to what I said previously, but of course I will convey back the various points that have been made. As I said, I am sure those on the Treasury Bench will convey the points back to the Department as well.
We will have a three-minute suspension to allow for the safe exit and entry of hon. and right hon. Members.
Sitting suspended.

ADJOURNMENT (CHRISTMAS)

Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing Order No. 25),
That this House, at its rising this day, do adjourn until Tuesday 5 January 2021.—(Tom Pursglove.)
Question agreed to.

TELECOMMUNICATIONS (SECURITY) BILL: PROGRAMME (NO. 2)

Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing Order No. 83A(7)),
That the Order of 30 November 2020 (Telecommunications (Security) Bill: Programme) be varied as follows:
In paragraph (2) of the Order (conclusion of proceedings in Public Bill Committee), for “Tuesday 19 January” substitute “Thursday 28 January”.—(Tom Pursglove..)
Question agreed to.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE (TODAY)

Ordered,
That, at this day’s sitting, the Speaker shall not adjourn the House until he has notified the Royal Assent to any Act agreed upon by both Houses.—(Tom Pursglove.)

Christmas Adjournment

Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House has considered matters to be raised before the forthcoming adjournment.—(Tom Pursglove.)

Rosie Winterton: I would rather not put a time limit on, but that will require Members not taking more than eight minutes for their speeches. I call Jack Lopresti.

Jack Lopresti: I will be as brief as I can, and well under the eight minutes, I think, Madam Deputy Speaker.
Before I raise a couple of constituency issues, I would like to offer my sincere thanks to all the House staff—the policemen, doorkeepers, catering staff; virtually everyone who works here—who have done so much to support us during this difficult year so that we can continue to work as safely as we can. We must not forget that they come here at some risk to themselves, given that every week we travel in from all over the country. So we are very grateful and I wish them a happy and restful Christmas.
The first issue I would like to raise is the matter of the M49 Severnside junction. Before the 2015 election, along with my right hon. Friend the Member for Kingswood (Chris Skidmore) and representatives from South Gloucestershire Council, I began a campaign for a link road to connect the M49 directly to the Severnside enterprise and distribution area. The link road will unlock thousands of jobs in the area, which already has a number of significant distribution centres, such as Amazon, Royal Mail and GKN Aerospace.
The junction was almost completed by Highways England at the end of 2019, at a cost, so far, of £50 million to the taxpayer. Much to my astonishment, however, the project has not been completed because there was no legal undertaking whatsoever for Highways England, the developer and the landowner to complete the project by building the link roads to the motorway. I cannot understand how planning permission was granted without securing a legal undertaking from the developer to build the necessary roads to connect this junction to the motorway, which would, as I said, not only unlock local jobs, but relieve the traffic in small villages around the area, such as Easter Compton and Pilning, which would help with the environment and traffic disturbance. It would also potentially unlock a fantastic opportunity, with the free ports and Brexit, to build thousands of good, sustainable jobs.
I have written to Transport Ministers and had a meeting with the Secretary of State for Transport, who has personally written to the developer asking for an update and a timescale. There has been so far no response and no progress, and this unfinished project is just sitting there. It must be completed; I cannot and will not allow the situation to continue any longer if I can prevent it. In the new year, I will seek a meeting with my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister to see whether we can exert some pressure and get this project—this fantastic opportunity—completed, not only for all the benefits I have mentioned, but for the considerable money spent by the taxpayer.
The second matter I wish to raise, with associated issues, is defence spending. Filton and Bradley Stoke and the west of England region is a centre of excellence for the aerospace and defence industries. In my constituency, at least 20,000 people’s jobs are directly linked to aerospace and defence. The south-west of England’s aerospace cluster is the largest in Europe, and the UK’s aerospace industry is the second largest in the world.
The announcement that the Government will honour their pledge to continue to invest in this country’s armed forces is hugely welcome. The pledge of £16.5 billion over four years, combined with the manifesto commitment of a 0.5% uplift, means that the total increase for defence is a substantial £24.1 billion. Thus, if the defence budget for this year is £42.6 billion, by 2024 it will be £54 billion. That will ensure that we can keep the UK safe and confirm our place as the second largest contributor in the NATO alliance and the largest in Europe.
The increase will also help to secure hundreds of jobs in my constituency and investment in our future capability. It will allow us to enhance and maintain our vital strategic sovereign defence manufacturing capability. It means that we will continue to be a reliable partner to our allies and friends around the world and, importantly, able to conduct operations in our own right unilaterally. This is not just about exporting hard power; it is about soft power, our values and humanitarian operations as much as about safeguarding our homeland.
I promised to be brief, so related directly to defence spend is the Tempest programme, which I welcome and thank the Government for their ongoing commitment to. The programme is essentially the development of the next generation of fighter aircraft, which will ensure that the UK can retain its world-leading position in combat aerospace and guarantee freedom of action. As I have said, hundreds of jobs in my constituency will be protected and increased over the years of its development. It has brought together BAE Systems, Rolls-Royce, MBDA and other European partners. That is fantastic news, and not only for our strategic defence capability. My hon. Friend the Member for Pudsey (Stuart Andrew), the Deputy Chief Whip, who is sitting in front of me, is a former Defence Minister and has visited my constituency regarding this programme. I thank him for that.
On a related theme, I will continue to be a candid friend. I am bearing in mind that the Deputy Chief Whip is sitting there listening to every word, although he is my proxy so I cannot really do much damage at the moment. I would like to address the question of the UK’s aerospace early warning capability. We undertook to purchase five E-7 Wedgetail aircraft, which will help to protect our aerospace and our national deterrent, and will be part of our vital AEW&C—airborne early warning and control—working with our colleagues across the world, and in NATO in particular. Will the Government therefore use the additional flexibility and the extra money granted by a multi-year settlement to revisit the decision to reduce our initial order of five to three? The reduced number will adversely affect our ability to support our NATO allies as well as to protect our own skies.
Finally, I pay tribute to all the NHS workers, care workers and other key workers in my constituency for the work they have done in the past 12 months. I have   been so inspired and impressed by the way that our small communities have worked together, looking after and taking extra care in minding our neighbours and friends. They, the faith groups, the churches and the voluntary sector have done an amazing job. We have all worked together and looked after one another, and I pay tribute to everyone for that. I wish everybody a very happy, peaceful and safe Christmas.

Navendu Mishra: I would like to start by paying tribute to all librarians and other staff working in the public library services across our nation, and of course in my constituency of Stockport. Research tells us that public libraries are a vital part of our social infrastructure. They empower and equalise our communities. They strengthen communities, improve digital inclusion, and help with everything from physical and mental health to cultural engagement, literacy, diversity, inclusion, and of course education. I am incredibly proud of the library staff in my borough of Stockport. They do an important job and are a key part of our community. The Central Library in the heart of my constituency is grade 2 listed, internally and externally, and is one of the original Carnegie-funded libraries, built in 1913. My town has a beautiful heritage and iconic buildings, from the Victorian viaduct, to the Central Library, to the outstanding Underbanks.
Sadly, a combination of covid and years of central Government underfunding have forced many local authorities to close public libraries and reduce the offer available to communities. Of course, public health must come first and foremost, but we must recognise the positive impact that public libraries make on the wellbeing of our constituents. It is evident that we need a fair financial settlement from the Government so that local authorities can continue to support libraries and all public services. I welcome the statement made earlier in the Chamber, but, as ever, the devil is in the detail, and we need to make sure that the funding is made available to all councils rather than to specific shires. I have a record of campaigning against Government austerity policies over the past decade, and this terrible pandemic has highlighted the need to support our local authorities properly.
Turning to another issue—I will be brief, Madam Deputy Speaker—I would like to start by commending the work of John Gurr, co-ordinator of the Western Sahara Campaign, and the all-party parliamentary group on Western Sahara. They have done a lot of work to raise awareness of this issue. I would also like to pay tribute to the chair of the all-party parliamentary group, the hon. Member for Ceredigion (Ben Lake), for years of activism on this issue and tireless efforts to resolve this long-running dispute. Unfortunately he is not able to be here today to speak on this matter, but he wanted me to mention the work of the APPG.
The situation in Western Sahara is at a tipping point and is becoming increasingly desperate for the region and its people. The conflict has had devastating humanitarian consequences. It is now 45 years since the displacement of the Sahrawi people, which has resulted in more than 180,000 Saharwi refugees living on international aid in bleak camps in south-western Algeria who are almost entirely dependent on aid to survive. The Moroccan-Western Sahara wall that separates the  two sides spans more than 2,700 km and is reinforced by military bases, artillery posts and airfields that run the length of the wall.
Despite that, both sides have respected a ceasefire agreement for almost 30 years. However, military clashes erupted last month between the Moroccan army and the Polisario Front, and tensions have been further stoked by the US Government’s decision to recognise Morocco’s sovereignty over the disputed region. President Trump’s message to the United Nations was not only a departure from long-standing US foreign policy in Western Sahara—it rode roughshod over the inalienable rights of the people of Sahara to self-determination, and furthermore it is a breach of United Nations Security Council Resolution 377, which was passed in the year 1975. The US Government’s reckless decision to recognise Morocco’s sovereignty over the territory risks even more fighting between the Polisario Front and Moroccan troops and puts tens of thousands of lives at risk. It is imperative that international law be respected and that disputes are resolved peacefully. The US Government’s wading into this conflict not only makes the region more unstable and jeopardises the ongoing negotiations, but it puts a peaceful resolution further away.
International charities and human rights organisations have been unanimous in their condemnation of President Trump’s declaration. Indeed, Oxfam’s country director for Algeria said:
“The implications of this move—ironically made on Human Rights Day—by the US Government will be severe. Only one month ago we witnessed the first collapse of the ceasefire between Morocco and Frente Polisario in 29 years—the peace process is moving backwards, not forwards.”
The International Crisis Group voiced similar concerns. Its north Africa director stated:
“I think we can safely say that this move makes the resolution of the current bout of violence much harder. This will also make Sahrawi youths more angry, mobilised and committed to resolving the conflict through force.”
It is further concerning that Amnesty International stated last month that access to the territory for human rights monitors and independent journalists has become increasingly difficult, restricting their ability to monitor the crisis. This is particularly troubling given the recent reports from local organisations monitoring the human rights situation in Western Sahara that last month’s conflict was followed up with a crackdown on peaceful Saharawi activists by Moroccan police, including raids on homes, increased surveillance and arrests.
It is vital that a United Nations personal envoy for Western Sahara be appointed immediately. The failure by the United Nations Secretary General to appoint an envoy for over 18 months has left a vacuum in the diplomatic leadership and enabled the situation to deteriorate. It is clear that restarting the political negotiation process is essential for regional stability and will be the most effective way to avoid any further escalation of the conflict.
Our Government must do all they can to support efforts to halt the current conflict and prevent further loss of life. The Foreign Secretary has stated that the UK’s position on Western Sahara remains unchanged and it continues to support the right to self-determination; however, the Government must go further in condemning the intervention by President Trump and supporting efforts to deliver a just settlement for the Saharawi people.
To finish, Madam Deputy Speaker, I wish you, and all the members of the staff of the House, who work so hard, a very happy Christmas. Their dedication empowers us to represent our constituents. I hope you have a restful and peaceful Christmas break.

Paul Holmes: I am pleased to speak in this debate to mark the Christmas Adjournment. I am particularly delighted that my hon. Friend the Deputy Chief Whip is on the Treasury Bench. He is a very close friend of mine and I have known him for many years, but I do not get to interact with him much in the House, other than when he tries to tell me off—or does tell me off—in the Whips Office. I look forward to giving him a slightly hard time this afternoon, with lots of long lists of what my constituents need—but not too long, Madam Deputy Speaker.
Perhaps in this debate my hon. Friend will be tempted to give me some positive news, although I do not expect that to continue for the rest of my career, particularly not good news from a Whip. None the less, I hope that this afternoon he will be able to give me good news on some of the things I want. He will not be surprised to hear that I have a few things to raise with the Government about what is going on in my constituency.
Of course, the first subject I have to talk about is the covid pandemic. It goes without saying that I pay tribute to all the health workers and businesses in my constituency who have struggled and worked really hard to make sure that the people of Eastleigh and Hampshire have the health services they need in my constituency and the wider region. The Health Secretary’s announcement this morning on the further tiers was welcome. I am pleased that calls from colleagues from across Hampshire for a splitting of geographical regions in the county were followed through. However, Eastleigh is sitting at 50 to 60 cases per 100,000 people and is the only place in Hampshire not currently seeing an increase among the over-60s, so may I gently say to the Deputy Chief Whip that I expect my region and constituency to remain under constant review? We need to drop a tier, and my constituents expect that to happen as soon as possible.
That brings me to the businesses in my constituency, which have invested thousands—hundreds of thousands —of pounds in making their businesses and their premises covid-secure. Of course it was welcome when, a couple of weeks ago, the Government announced further assistance for the hospitality sector, in particular wet-led pubs and small breweries, but businesses in my constituency such as the Steam Town Brew Company, the CrackleRock Brewing Company and the Botley Brewery need more support. The £1,000 was welcome, but they need further support, especially those that had previously invested to make sure that their businesses could continue. Perhaps the Deputy Chief Whip might like to speak to the Treasury in future so that we can see whether we can continue small brewery business rate relief as we go forward. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear!”] That sounds very popular, so perhaps it might happen.
My constituency is not different from any other constituencies in the country, and we desperately need infrastructure. The Deputy Chief Whip will remember that I raised this issue in my maiden speech. My Liberal Democrat council has not had a sustainable housing  local plan for over a decade, and the Liberal Democrat council in Eastleigh personally buys land and develops it itself. I do not have a problem with that, but when there is a lack of a sustainable local plan, it is open to speculative developments, often put forward by the borough council. I am raising the possibility of the Deputy Chief Whip asking the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government about this so that his Department starts to take a stronger line on local authorities that are not developing local plans. It is fair to say that there is a local plan process in place. The local plan that was proposed by the Liberal Democrat council was found to be unsound, and 5,000 houses were taken out of ancient woodland in Bishopstoke, which is welcome, but the local plan process is painfully slow. The council is not delivering on that local plan and speculative developments are being accepted on green belt right across the constituency.
While I welcome housing and want it to be built, I just say to the Deputy Chief Whip that I did get an early Christmas present when we heard that there was a change in emphasis on the housing algorithm going forward. He will acknowledge my feelings on the housing algorithm, and it is certainly welcome, but tougher interaction from the Department on local plans would be very welcome.
When houses come, there has to be further infrastructure, and there are two particular things that I want to raise today on behalf of my constituency. The first is the levelling-up fund, which is incredibly welcome. I strongly welcomed that emphasis from the Chancellor when it was announced, but can I ask for a reassurance that southern constituencies will receive equal weighting if they bring forward a bid to Government and the Treasury on infrastructure projects—

Jonathan Gullis: You’re fired.

Paul Holmes: My hon. Friend just said “You’re fired” from a sedentary position, I think. I am not in that situation yet, but we will see.
I would like to know whether there will be an equal weight on bids put in by southern constituencies. Since the 1980s, my constituents in Eastleigh have been promised the Chickenhall Lane road link—I mentioned this in my maiden speech—which would ease congestion in an incredibly tight geographical area in the town centre. With the added housing, we need that. I am ready to bring forward a bid. The county council is ready to bring forward a bid. The borough council is willing to bring a bid forward, and I hope that that would be looked on favourably.
The other thing, when more houses come, is that transport links need to improve. The number of people using Hedge End railway station is increasing because our ex-villages are now becoming small towns. We applied for funding for the station to have accessibility, because at the moment my constituents have to travel down the M27 to go to either Southampton Airport Parkway or Eastleigh train stations. It is not good for people with disabilities or people who are not able-bodied if they have to drive down the M27 to get access to London or further into south Hampshire, particularly when the Government’s green agenda, which is completely welcome, is not being helped when we have extra motorway usage to use those railway stations. I hope that Hedge  End station will be looked on favourably in future funding rounds. The Government can be sure that I will be standing up and asking about that issue again.
On a more important issue, I have raised before the plight of independent lifeboat stations, such as the Hamble lifeboat station in my constituency. It has struggled through a lack of fundraising because of the pandemic and the expenses incurred with PPE, all while operating as normal to keep one of the UK’s busiest waterways safe. I have previously called for the rescue boat grant fund, which was extremely welcome, to be reinstated to help independent lifeboat stations. Working alongside my hon. Friends the Members for Totnes (Anthony Mangnall) and for Hastings and Rye (Sally-Ann Hart), we are looking to try to establish an independent lifeboat station commission so that we can try to get the funding necessary for that issue.
Lastly—you will be glad to hear, Madam Deputy Speaker—this year has been completely out of the ordinary for me serving my first year as a Member in this House. It has been extraordinary because unprecedented demand has been placed on our staff by constituents—quite rightly, because they needed help. I pay tribute to all Members’ staff, particularly my staff Sue, Ben, Charlie and Emma, who have worked tirelessly at all hours to try to get people’s issues sorted. More importantly—they will not like me saying that—I pay tribute to the Doorkeepers, parliamentary staff and security staff, who have made me feel particularly welcome in my first year. They have helped me and colleagues from all parts of the House to really settle in. I pay tribute to the staff in the Tea Room, who constantly put up with my pleas that I am on a diet when I order my red velvet cake, which is very good. They serve it without judgment, and they never remind me that I am on a diet, despite my putting on the parliamentary stone in my first year.
I wish you, Madam Deputy Speaker, the Speaker, all Members of this House and all staff in this House an incredibly safe Christmas, but hopefully a better year when we all come back together in 2021.

Meg Hillier: I smile wryly to myself, as the hon. Member for Eastleigh (Paul Holmes) talks about being on a diet. He can look at me and see how it fails after 15 years. Clearly I need to take a leaf out of his book. The cycling in clearly is not working yet, but I live in hope.
There are some very important issues to raise, and I am glad to have the chance in this debate to raise issues affecting my constituency and the country as a whole. One of the key issues affecting many householders in my constituency is unsafe cladding on tower blocks and leasehold properties. In the early ’90s, Hackney demolished a lot of council housing stock in high-rise flats that had not lasted well. Between Birmingham, Glasgow and Hackney, we had more high rises than any other part of the country. We demolished those, but they have been replaced with private sector leasehold properties.
I must declare an interest in that I live in one of those properties. I am affected by the issue of fire-safe cladding, but the developer that built my block is funding its entire removal, so I am not financially affected, which is a blessing for me, but most of my constituents affected by this issue are not in that happy situation.
The Government have announced a total over the past few years of £1.6 billion to remove cladding in the light of the Grenfell tragedy. The first tranche was to remove the same type of cladding as was on Grenfell, and the next tranche was to recognise that other cladding is also unsafe and needs removing. There was, however, no new money in the spending review this year, and that alarms me, because that £1.6 billion was effectively re-announced. That is a little trick I am aware of as Chair of the Public Accounts Committee. I say this to be helpful to Members on the Government Benches: beware a figure brandished by a Minister in this House, because usually it is not as simple as they suggest. The £1.6 billion available to remove cladding is exactly that; it has already been announced. We had the cladding fund announced in March just before the pandemic really kicked off, which was £1 billion on top of the £0.6 billion that was previously put forward and had mostly been spent. There have been bids in for the £1 billion, but it is about a 10th of what is needed to replace the cladding.
I have hundreds of constituents—there are thousands up and down the country—who are trapped in homes that are technically valueless and that they cannot sell or get permission to do anything on, even if they are less risky, because they need certain bits of paperwork, such as the infamous EWS1 form. It is clearly a bigger issue than the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government can solve on its own. Its budget alone will not resolve this. It needs a proper cross-Government review of how these people are going to be supported.

Julian Lewis: I alert the Government to a not unrelated problem, which is not about fire safety but about the plans to allow extra storeys to be built on top of high-rise blocks. Before the Government announced their plan, it happened to the block in which I live. We had a floor built above us. The builders then declared themselves bankrupt, and all sorts of charges are being levied on the innocent leaseholders who are having to fork out for faults that were not of their own making.

Meg Hillier: The right hon. Gentleman raises an important point and underlinesthe longer-term need for leasehold reform. I welcome the fact that the Government are committed to doing that. We have obviously had a lot of upheaval this year, but it is something that we all need to work on. Many people now live in leasehold properties and need protection.
We all need to join forces, and I will join forces with whoever, in this House and beyond, to try to persuade the Treasury, and perhaps the Prime Minister too—that is the level of the decision that will have to be made—to provide the funding. There are really only three ways to do it: through finance vehicles, although they can affect mortgages, as we can imagine people having to take out a loan or a charge on their property; as a direct grant, which would cost the taxpayer, but I cannot see much alternative given the fact that this consumer and fire-safety failure is the biggest in a generation; or the sector pays, which I would love to see, but we would have to wait.
I applaud the former Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, the right hon. Member for Old Bexley and Sidcup (James Brokenshire),  for getting a ministerial direction for the first tranche of fire-safety money because he knew that it would take so long to track down the owners of properties and that so much legal cost would be involved that it would not be feasible. He recognised that, so I urge the Government to recognise it too, and to come to the rescue of my constituents who are waiting. It is an uncertain year and an uncertain Christmas and, as it stands, there is no further money for the 12 months after March next year.
Let me touch on the issue of schooling, and particularly the issues relating to covid. It has been a really challenging year for our schools and all the staff working in them, and of course the parents and pupils are affected too. When schools had to stop teaching physically, for the most part, there were not enough laptops. No one would have predicted that we would need quite so many so fast, but the Government continually overpromised and underdelivered on the laptops and other necessary equipment. Many constituents of mine—around a third of them overall, although the number fluctuates, particularly with more people going on to benefits at the moment—are on free school meals. They do not all have access to wi-fi or equipment at home to work on, so pupils have been working on their parents’ mobile phones that are on contract, not on data-rich wi-fi. This has had a real impact: the gap between the richest and poorest students is getting wider in a constituency where for 20 years we have been shrinking that gap. A number of my local schools are in the top 1% in the country.

Siobhain McDonagh: Is my hon. Friend aware that to connect to the Government’s Oak National Academy on pay-as-you-go costs something like £37 a day?

Meg Hillier: I gasp, because most of my constituents do not have £37 left at the end of the month, let alone to spend every day on wi-fi. It is a real problem. I have poverty in my constituency—people see the trendy side of Shoreditch and Hackney, and there is wealth, but there is also immense poverty—but there is no poverty of ambition and children have been doing very well at school. We need to make sure that the catch-up money is available. The permanent secretary at the Department for Education gave a commitment today that she would do everything in her power, but we know that her power is limited unless funding is available to make sure that the tutoring and catch-up is in place.

Jonathan Gullis: Will the hon. Lady support the campaign that I have been working on alongside the IT provider Cuckoo, which is calling on the Treasury to look at defining broadband as an essential item and reducing VAT on it to 5%? We are led to believe that that would save on average £70 per household, which is a small but still significant saving for many families.

Meg Hillier: The hon. Gentleman and I sing from the same hymn sheet: broadband needs to be seen as an essential service. The Public Accounts Committee has looked at the idea. Government after Government have not quite got there with getting broadband fully rolled out, but it is vital. It is heartening that during the height of the pandemic broadband did hold up for those who had it; my particular concern is for the people who do not have it.
The exams fiasco this year has really hit young people hard. The Government need to be really clear about their plans for next year. My key ask of the Government is that information is clear and timely. We have seen too many Saturday-night or Friday-night announcements from No. 10 Downing Street about what will happen in schools on the next school day. That does not leave enough time for headteachers and school leaders to plan and makes it impossible for parents, especially if they are working. We should remember that many parents will not earn money if they do not go to work: they do not get the luxury of paid leave, parental leave or employment that they can do from home, although that is hard enough for people with children at home.
There seems to be a real gap between Whitehall  and the centre of Government and the reality on the ground for parents, pupils and teachers. The Government really have to get a grip on this issue. Only this morning, the permanent secretary was unable to tell the Public Accounts Committee what would happen in schools on 4 or 5 January. While we were in Committee, it was being laid out by various journalists who had clearly been briefed, but we were not able to get answers from the very top civil servant. That is ludicrous. That was a chance for parliamentarians of all parties—admittedly, a small group of us on the Public Accounts Committee—to ask direct questions. It seems that, as it stands, we will not have that opportunity today, on the last day that Parliament sits. We need earlier decisions and clarity on decisions and, crucially, school leaders need to be involved, because the logistics are vital.
I want to touch on some of the issues with tier 3 and covid. What concerns me, as I see Manchester and Leicester still in tier 3, is whether there is any understanding of the route out. My constituency, in London, went into tier 3 at fast pace on Tuesday night, and that followed a 10 o’clock curfew for hospitality, which hit my constituency very badly. When I challenged Ministers and the Prime Minister on the rationale behind the 10 o’clock curfew, I got the impression that it was rather subjective, which was very much proved by the introduction of an 11 o’clock curfew later. The Government should give some trust to the businesses in my patch; they are well run, well organised and can manage to run a very controlled environment inside if they are given the opportunity. We have also seen a huge impact on the creative industries, particularly the forgotten freelancers. I have a large number of them in my constituency, many of whom have not received a penny since March. They are living on fresh air, and it is unacceptable. We need a clear route map out of tier 3, and I look forward to that.
My final point is about Brexit. What a shambles. We are here today on 17 December. The Government—the Prime Minister, indeed—offered and promised an oven-ready deal. As I stand here today, we do not even have a cold turkey coming out of the negotiations. The Public Accounts Committee has 13 times now, in different reports, raised concerns about preparedness. With 14 days to go, it will be a miracle if anyone is prepared for the chaos that could ensue.

Elliot Colburn: Let me begin by associating myself with the words of the Chair of the Public Accounts Committee, particularly about cladding and getting London out of tier 3 as soon as we can.
Madam Deputy Speaker, 2020 was not quite the year we envisaged, particularly for me as a first-time Member of this House. It is important that we remember that behind all the statistics we have heard, at many Christmas dinner tables this year a loved one—a family member or a friend—will not be sitting in their chair because they have been taken from us too soon by this terrible virus. Of course, our collective national effort this year has been about tackling coronavirus. Out of the 10,000 bits of casework that have come through my mailbox this past year, the overwhelming majority have been related to the pandemic in some way. I hope that this Christmas we will remember those we lost too soon, and I also want to pay tribute to our frontline workers—those in the NHS but also those in all the other essential services who kept going throughout the pandemic—for everything they have done for us this year.
As well as tackling coronavirus and the issues related to it, I have not been deterred from standing up on the issues that the residents of Carshalton and Wallington elected me to raise a year ago. One of those is jobs and the local economy. Even before the pandemic, residents were raising with me concerns about how long shops would stay empty on our local high streets. That was not just in our main shopping centres, such as Carshalton High Street and Woodcote Road in Wallington, but on our small shopping broadways that are so often forgotten, such as Hackbridge, the Rose Hill roundabout, the Circle, Beddington, Carshalton Beeches, the Mount in Clockhouse, Wallington Green and others. I have spoken in this place many times about support for businesses, and the support that the Government have put in place during the pandemic has been unprecedented. It is incredibly welcome. I want our local economy not just to survive but to thrive once the pandemic has passed, so in 2021 I intend to work with the local businesses to push for the improvement funding that is needed and to use tools such as business improvement districts, so that businesses can get together and show what they can do to help them bounce back after the pandemic.
Transport is another major concern for residents, and was before the pandemic. Obviously, passenger numbers on our public transport networks are incredibly low. I think you may have even been in the Chair, Madam Deputy Speaker, during my Adjournment debate back in June. You may have heard me speak about the fact that despite being in a London borough, Carshalton and Wallington is incredibly poorly connected compared with the rest of London. During that debate, I drew attention to the need for additional investment in public transport infrastructure. Our excellent candidate for the London Assembly, Neil Garratt, has shone a light on some of the astonishing figures on public transport in Carshalton and Wallington, not least of which is the fact that Sutton consistently comes last for investment from City Hall compared with all other London Boroughs. Projects such as the Tramlink extension and the Go Sutton bus, which have been fought for for so long, now have a very bleak future indeed.
We have had some good news. This year we commenced the National Rail consultation on the Croydon bottleneck scheme, which, if it goes ahead, will unlock additional rail capacity in suburban London, including to Carshalton, Wallington, Hackbridge and Carshalton Beeches stations. On top of that, Transport for London is running  consultations on improvements to the local bus network.In 2021, I will continue to work with our London Assembly team to push for those improvements.
I will also work with local councillors to hold the council to account over failures in its road closure schemes, which are causing chaos on local roads. One concern is about the impact that these road closures schemes have on the local environment, as air pollution builds up when traffic starts backing up on main roads. That is not a new worry; protecting our green spaces and cleaning up air pollution has long been a concern, not just during the pandemic, as more and more people are using their cars.
The Beddington incinerator is the best example I can give. The incinerator can be seen from many points across my constituency, and I have raised it in the House many times this year. It is partly because of the incinerator that I want to see more air quality monitoring stations put in place across the constituency, especially near the site, so that residents can access independently gathered, real-time data about the air that they are breathing. We have heard a willingness to install one near the site, so I hope that the council and the operating company will deliver on that promise.
Linked to that, I want to continue to stand up for our fabulous local green spaces. Indeed, Sutton is one of the greenest boroughs in London. Whether it be fighting the council’s previous proposals to build on Wellfield open space, build a school at Sheen Way or put a Traveller site at Roundshaw playing fields, I will continue to protect our green spaces and fight to enhance them—for example, by delivering the promised Beddington Farmlands projects and protecting parks from overdevelopment, so that our residents can enjoy the open space and our children can be sure that they are breathing cleaner air.
One of the best things that we can give our children is a good or outstanding local school to go to. Carshalton and Wallington is lucky to be home to some of the best schools in the country. Indeed, some of our grammar schools, such as Wallington County Grammar School, Wilson’s School and Wallington High School for Girls often appear at Nos. 1, 2 and 3 in the league tables. I benefited from an excellent education at Carshalton Boys Sports College, and I want every local child to have that same opportunity, but we simply do not have enough secondary school places in Sutton to cope with the demand. I hope that the Planning Inspectorate will decide next year to approve planning permission for a new secondary school at Rosehill, which the council is currently trying to block, so that we can build the schools that our children need and give every local child a good or outstanding local school place.
Another area that has been a concern throughout the pandemic and before it is crime and antisocial behaviour. Carshalton and Wallington is statistically one of the safest parts of London, but the pandemic has shone a light on an increasing number of incidents, especially of catalytic converter theft, pet theft, vehicle-related crime, antisocial behaviour and, tragically, domestic violence. The increase in police officers in London is incredibly welcome, and I am glad that Sutton will benefit from that uplift. Working closely with the local police, I hope that we can find the people behind these organised  crimes and encourage a greater police presence in some of our worst-affected areas, such as the St Helier estate and Roundshaw.
Finally, the biggest issue, not just during the pandemic but for many years, has been our amazing local hospital, St Helier. As a former NHS worker who was born at St Helier, and as the hospital saved my fiancé’s life last year, I make no apology for making St Helier the No. 1 thing that I will be fighting for. Even before I was elected. I was making the case with my hon. Friends the Members for Sutton and Cheam (Paul Scully), for Wimbledon (Stephen Hammond) and for Reigate (Crispin Blunt) that St Helier needed investment and that we needed a third local hospital to complement Epsom and St Helier Hospitals.
Our local hospital has been there for us during the pandemic. I am therefore delighted that the Government have listened to the calls and backed the NHS with a £500 million investment in Epsom and St Helier Hospitals. That half a billion pound package will not just upgrade Epsom and St Helier to become modern, 21st-century healthcare facilities but build a third, purpose-built, state-of-the-art new hospital to provide acute services, saving services that were previously going to be lost to outside the borough, such as A&E and maternity. I want to put on record my thanks to Daniel Elkeles and all the staff at Epsom and St Helier for helping to bring that about and for their amazing contribution to tackling the pandemic in an incredibly difficult year.
Despite the pandemic, Carshalton and Wallington has achieved a lot this year, but there is still a lot more work to do. We all hope for a better 2021. As well as supporting the community through the pandemic, I want to continue standing up for Carshalton and Wallington’s interests here in this place, to support our thriving local economy, improve our transport links, protect our parks and clean up our air, provide a good or outstanding school place for every child, keep our area safe and deliver that £500 million investment into St Helier.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I want to finish by wishing you, Mr Speaker, all the House staff, my own team—Tommy, Lewis, Richard, Daisy and Catherine—and everyone in Carshalton and Wallington a very merry Christmas and a happy 2021.

Siobhain McDonagh: May I take this opportunity to wish you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and of course all the Members and staff here a very happy Christmas? It has been, as people have said, a truly turbulent year. May I put on the record my gratitude and enormous respect for the extraordinary frontline staff in our country, particularly our medical and care staff, whom history will remember as the pride of our generation?
The service of my constituency and the people who live in it has always been my priority during the 23 years I have had the privilege of representing Mitcham and Morden, but as we have all stayed at home and worked at home, even more of my focus has been local. When the nation searched for PPE, scrambled for tests and desperately secured university places, I am sure that all Members, like me, felt duty-bound to fight loudest for their constituents. I wake up every morning and remember just how lucky I am to have that responsibility
However, I am afraid that there are some things that no Member should bear the burden of responsibility for, including ensuring that the children in their constituency have a meal and an education. This year, my local area has been forced to open an eighth food bank to account for the growing number of people who simply cannot afford to put food on the table. Every week at our Friday morning food bank, the queue grows longer, and more hard-working families tell me that they have lost their jobs, let down by the dither and delay that the Prime Minister has shown at every turn. We have stepped in where the Government have failed.
Meanwhile, when schools closed in March, the Government failed those children who could not continue learning from home without the tools required to log in. The lockdown exposed the digital divide across the UK, with approximately 9% of children—Ofcom estimates their number to be up to an extraordinary 1.78 million—without access to a laptop, desktop or tablet. While the Department for Education promoted its online Oak National Academy, let us be clear that no number of online lessons could benefit those children unable to log in from home.
My community rallied, securing hundreds of devices packed with data for children in some of the most vulnerable families. No child’s education should be dependent on their internet access. Once again, we stepped in where the Government had failed. Many of those families are trapped in temporary accommodation, spending lockdown in cramped rooms with no outside space. Under the Government’s watch, the number of families in temporary accommodation has soared, with 127,240 children destined to wake up on Christmas morning without a permanent place to call home.
I recognise the challenge for any Government in a global crisis, but no matter where we sit in the Chamber, our reaction to yesterday’s news that UNICEF will be feeding hungry children in the UK for the first time in its 70-year history must have been one of shock and shame—shock and shame for the Government, that is, not for UNICEF. I understand that the Leader of House said earlier today that UNICEF “should be ashamed”. He is a proud Catholic. I am too, but I am aware that my religion puts the need for self-awareness and responsibility at the top of its beliefs. If we are to be responsible, the Government should be aware of their failings in regard to vulnerable children and not try to blame the charities attempting to resolve some of those difficulties.
I do not just want to be negative; I also wish to be positive. It is not a silver bullet, but may I raise with the Minister an easy, tangible step forward and ask him to discuss it with his colleagues in the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government? In September 2018, the then Prime Minister announced that a stamp duty surcharge of up to 3% would be imposed on overseas residential property investors and that all the money generated would be used to tackle homelessness. It was expected to raise £140 million. The percentage has changed three times since and is now set to be 2%, meaning that a £40 million loss is due to be implemented in April. Reverting to 3% on overseas properties will not resolve homelessness, but it would make another £40 million available, and help an awful lot of people. Food banks, the digital divide, and homelessness are three issues that arrive as a trio, presenting  hardship to some of the most vulnerable people in our society. The number of people this hardship impacts continues to soar.
I would like to finish by voicing the case of the millions of people and businesses who remain excluded from Government support through no fault of their own, many of whom, when they can no longer afford to pay their rent or mortgage, could face the difficulties I have described today: hard-working people in my constituency, such as Paul the photographer, Zohra the childminder, and Larry the florist, who this Government continue to overlook. Initially, they were told that it was too complicated to include them in the support schemes, but almost a year on, I am afraid that excuse simply does not wash. The Government have failed enough people this year, but Minister, it is not too late to listen.

Matt Rodda: It is a pleasure to follow my hon. Friend the Member for Mitcham and Morden (Siobhain McDonagh), and I pay tribute to both her campaigning work and the insight she has given to the House this afternoon, which I found most moving and quite powerful. I would like to address three issues this afternoon: the first is to reflect on 2020, which has been a very difficult year for all of us, as I am sure we would all agree. I want to spend some time paying tribute to all of those who have served our community so well during this year. Secondly, I would also like to draw the House’s attention to, and comment on, the current crisis with the spike in the infection rate due to the coronavirus. Thirdly, I would like to move on and look ahead to what I hope we can all agree will be a better and brighter year—we hope—in 2021, as a vaccine is rolled out.
I think it is fair to say that the past year has been an extremely difficult and challenging year, one that is genuinely unprecedented in modern British history and, indeed, world history. I pay tribute to a number of groups of people: first and foremost, I would obviously like to give my heartfelt thanks to our NHS and care workers, particularly those in my constituency of Reading East, such as those working at the Royal Berkshire Hospital, in GPs’ surgeries and the community, or in care homes. Those people have worked incredibly hard; it is difficult to imagine what they have been through, and I am sure the whole House will agree that across the country, and indeed around the world, we owe our health and care workers an enormous debt of gratitude. It is difficult for us as laypeople to fully express the level of our sincere and complete appreciation for the work they do.
I would also like to thank other groups of workers, bearing in mind in particular my shadow ministerial responsibilities as shadow Transport Minister. I have been deeply impressed by the work of our key workers during the crisis in this country, and I have previously put on record my support for, and recognition of the work of, those in the transport sector; I would like to do so again. It is particularly important to consider the contribution made by bus drivers and other workers in the transport sector who have put themselves at risk during this crisis, and have continued to provide reliable, safe and appropriate services during a time of national crisis. I also understand—I believe we all understand—the enormous contributions made by other key workers, whether in retail or a wide range of aspects of public  service, ranging from the most straightforward to ones that are perhaps behind the scenes. I would like to spend some time paying tribute to those workers, some of whom have spent an enormous amount of time and energy in the service of our community, and some of whom have paid quite heavily for that service.
I am sure the whole House would agree that a great service to our country is being provided by our public servants; however, their efforts have been supplemented by volunteers.
I wish to say a brief word about some of the voluntary groups across my constituency. I am sure that, similarly, there are others around the country that have carried out the same vital functions. Indeed, other Members have mentioned some of these today, especially those groups running food banks and providing emergency help and relief to the most needy. We have an enormous number in Reading and, indeed, in suburban areas such as Woodley and Caversham, which are often thought of as relatively affluent. Enormous problems have been created by the pandemic and the way that the community has rallied together has been quite simply outstanding and deeply impressive, and it has been supported very valiantly by local authorities.
I wish to say a brief word about the work of Reading Borough Council, which I am very proud to be associated with—I should declare an interest as a former councillor. There has been impressive cross-party working in the authority, partnership with the voluntary sector through Reading Voluntary Action and, indeed, an impressive level of support across the town. Briefly, let me mention a couple of agencies, particularly ReadiFood, the Trussell Trust and a number of other food banks and support organisations. I have mentioned others in previous speeches, so I will not overdo my slot by mentioning every single one by name, but I am deeply grateful for their work and I commend their work to colleagues.
Finally, it is also important to consider the way that our whole community, and indeed the country, has responded during this crisis. It was quite moving that we reflected on VE Day during this crisis. In fact, at the very height and pinnacle of the crisis, we were celebrating the contribution of previous generations to this country. We need to recognise that the whole community has contributed quite substantially during this very difficult period. I am sure colleagues will all agree that the broad community, going beyond anybody with a special role, deserves to have some recognition for the work that has been done whether that is just people in their day-to-day lives socially distancing and putting up with the necessary, but extensive range of restrictions, including the separation from friends and family and from loved ones. We are all missing our loved ones greatly, and it is important to bear that all in mind as we look back on 2020 and hope for a better future in 2021.
Let me move ahead. I wish to mention briefly the current crisis. I hope that I am still in time. I cannot see the clock because the camera is in the way. Obviously, we are all aware that many parts of the country, including my own county of Berkshire, have moved into different tiers in the past few hours. This is difficult; it is not easy. However, the important point is that we appreciate the actions that are being taken, but I urge the Government to look again at their advice for the Christmas period. It  is much easier for people if they have clear and simple rules, not complicated and overly elaborate ones. I hope that the Government will think again about that in the run-up to Christmas. We all want to see our loved ones, but we want to be safe. It is so important that we take stock at this difficult time and that we continue our efforts while the vaccine is being rolled out. I am sure that we all agree with that—this is not a party political point. The question is how we deliver that effectively in partnership with the community. I raise that with Ministers and hope that they think about Christmas.
I am grateful for the action that has been taken on the tiers, even though it is difficult. I also ask Ministers to look again at the broadbrush approach. I say to the Minister on the Front Bench that, as an Opposition Member, I am grateful for the way that the Government have offered economic support. We have all seen the need for Government action to be taken at this time of national crisis. Perhaps some people have reassessed their view of the economy as a result. However, the action that has been taken has been somewhat broadbrush. I ask the Chancellor to look again at the way that the money has been distributed within that overall financial envelope. It has been quite telling to see wealthy supermarkets, which have increased their sales during the crisis, actually handing money back, while people in small and medium-sized enterprises, the lifeblood of our economy, especially those in the new SMEs, who have set up small businesses and are trying very hard, are receiving no support whatsoever. I am thinking of the 3 million people across the country. I have been contacted by many in my own constituency—I am sure that we all have. I urge the Government to look again at the spread of their spending and to think a bit more about how best to use that effectively and I do hope that Ministers will take that point away.
Finally, I would like to wish everyone, particularly you, Madam Deputy Speaker, other colleagues, our staff and the country a very merry Christmas and a happy new year. I hope that we can look ahead to a brighter new year with a better future ahead.

Jackie Doyle-Price: I fully endorse the remarks of the hon. Member for Reading East (Matt Rodda); I think we are all looking forward to 2021 being a whole lot better than the year we are leaving. I also associate myself with what he said in the tribute he has paid to his community; we have seen the best of our communities in response to this pandemic, and I wish to pay tribute to everyone in my constituency for stepping up to the challenge and bearing a difficult year with great fortitude. Let us all hope that next year is so much better.
In that vein, I wish to talk about how we come back out of this crisis and to advise the House about the exciting plans we are making in Thurrock in our bid for a Thames estuary freeport, led by the ports of Tilbury and London Gateway. Members have often heard me claim that Thurrock is the port capital of the UK. As a centre of excellence for ports and logistics, there is no stronger case to be made than for a freeport to be located in Thurrock—[Interruption.] I am sure that my hon. Friend the Member for Southend West (Sir David Amess) will fully agree with that. It is the natural evolution of the role of the Thames as an engine of wealth creation and prosperity. We sit here in this  Parliament on the Thames. London is a great capital city, one of the richest cities in the world, but it is located here only because of the Thames and because the Romans set up the port of Londinium. So it makes great sense in the natural evolution of history—of exploiting our River Thames and our position as a maritime nation—to make sure we continue that evolution and establish the Thames estuary freeport in Thurrock.
People often think that the ships have left the Thames, but the fact of the matter is that all they did was move east. Tilbury had the first container port in the country, in 1968, just before I was born—seamless history there. We now have Britain’s deepest sea port, which aims to be the biggest, at London Gateway; that has been the biggest inward investment in Europe, and opened within this past decade. I can also advise the House that we have Britain’s newest port, in Tilbury2, and that it took just one year between planning permission and the first ship arriving. If only all our public infrastructure projects were that efficient.
A little known fact is that the Thames remains Britain’s second largest port—second only in terms of tonnage landed to the Humber. We often hear people talk about Dover and other ports, but the port of London is still a significant one—it has just moved east to Thurrock. Having paid tribute to the entirety of my community and how they have responded to the challenge of covid, it has to be said that the ships that arrive in Tilbury and London Gateway are the ones that have kept us fed during this past year. The ships have continued to be unloaded and our dock workers have continued to go to work, and this is something we often take for granted. People are looking forward to finally leaving the European Union, and although we have heard much prediction of chaos and difficulty, I can tell them that the ports in Thurrock are extremely well prepared. As I said, they built Tilbury2 in the past year, specifically with the purpose of being Brexit-ready. I can advise the House that we already have ships relocating their routes from Dover to Tilbury to take advantage of what is a changed economic situation for how our ports will work. I think Members will see the great pride I have in representing what is our maritime capital. This is an astonishingly competitive sector, one with which it is a pleasure to work. It is also a pleasure because the ports invest hugely in the local community and are massively committed to increasing skills and to making that big community contribution, so it is a great delight for me to continue to support them.
That takes us on to what our freeport bid would look like. As I said, we have the port of Tilbury, which is owned by Forth Ports, which is obviously Scottish—again, it is good for the Union that we have this partnership—and London Gateway, which is led by DP World. So this is a partnership born out of two competitors, and it is a staggering feat for them to be taking this forward.
We also have another great opportunity. As I mentioned, the Thames as a port has moved east, but there are jetties all the way into London, including one at Ford in Dagenham. We all recall that for many decades Dagenham was a vast site and a massive car manufacturer. In recent years, that manufacturing presence has declined, not least because our car habits have declined. When some of the car production was moved to more competitive locations in the world, the site moved to manufacturing just diesel engines. Of course, demand for that is now falling off. Obviously, we want to keep Ford’s presence  here in the UK and for it to play a bigger part, particularly as we leave the European Union and look to new global relationships.
I am therefore very excited to advise the House that not only have the two ports of Tilbury and London Gateway come together to discuss that, but we are working with Ford to see how a partnership can be formed so that we can develop a new centre of excellence for electric and autonomous vehicles. That is the future. That is exactly the kind of post-Brexit opportunity we should take full advantage of.
I very much hope that the Government will give their full support to the Thames estuary freeport, not least because for decades, successive Governments tried to get the Thames estuary moving as an economic entity. That never quite worked because we in south Essex do not really like being told what to do by people from London. We like to control our own destiny and that is exactly what we have done. The Thames estuary is an idea whose time has come. Our freeport will be the catalyst to make that happen and I look forward to working with the Government to ensure that the Thames estuary freeport underlines Thurrock’s position as the port capital of the UK.

Jim Shannon: It is a pleasure to speak in the Adjournment debate, which is different from all the others I normally try to participate in. This has been one of the most difficult times in our living memories. There will be so many homes with empty chairs, so many loved ones who cannot meet because of restrictions, and so many who will have no heart to celebrate.
Looking back, I think of those precious to me who have been lost through coronavirus and cancer this year, those who have been taken in accidents and those who felt that they had no option other than to end their lives. It has been a difficult time for so many and it is easy to feel downhearted, but I have also seen a community pulling together, with people helping neighbours, and perhaps speaking to neighbours they had not spoken to before or had not spoken to for a long time. We have seen glimmers of a silver lining with family Zoom chats to keep connected, grandparents learning how to FaceTime—I am one of them, at long last, my wife says—and an upsurge in baking; my mother is a fantastic baker and cook and we have been sustained by her good foodstuffs over the last period. It reminds me of God’s promise that what the enemy means for evil, God brings good out of it.
This Christmas will look very different for so many of us, but the message remains the same. It is a message of joy, of peace and, perhaps what we need the most, of hope. Things are bleak, but there is hope. I have that certainty of hope from my faith, but I also have hope as I see how some people have reacted during the pandemic. When I see the goodness of people to strangers, hear stories of fundraising for strangers in danger of losing their homes, see mystery gifts appearing on doorsteps, learn that the foodbank in my constituency has had more referrals than ever this year, but enough donations to meet those needs through the generosity of the people of Strangford, I have hope.
I am inspired by the normal, everyday person’s reaction to the events that have been out of their control, which is to make the best of it. As my mother would say—and  she is definitely an Ulster Scot—“Get up and get on with it without gurning.” We do that, even though it might produce a wrinkle on our brow and some anxiety. I have seen so many people get on with it: our NHS workers in dangerous situations determined to come into work and make a difference; retired NHS staff stepping up and putting their shoulder to the plough once more—truly the angels in blue; businesses making adaptions to produce hand sanitiser, which they provided at cost to local companies. There are so many reasons to be glad that I am British. I am proud to be British when I see the overwhelming response by the British people. That should encourage us.
I love Christmas, and the dinner with the family. This is a different year for the family this year: last year, we were 14; this year we will be five, and two children under two. That is what the rules tell us we must do, and we will obey the rules because I want to get out the other side of this and I also believe that we have a responsibility to others. It is the time to read the gospel accounts of the birth of Jesus, knowing that this was the first step in the redemptive plan of love that offers hope to every one of us. Christmas will be different, but one thing that remains is love.
I urge the people of this United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to show love and bring hope this Christmas: the handwritten card could mean the world coming through the post; the lovely potted Christmas plant left at a neighbour’s door to bring cheer; the phone call made with no time pressures or restrictions; or the small thoughtful gift delivered with a smile and a wave. All of these are not the way we usually do it, but we can hold to the traditions of love and hope, and just try to be different this Christmas to encourage each other in what we do. I am hopeful that the light at the end of the coronavirus tunnel is getting slightly brighter, but there are still those who mourn, still those who are fervently praying for loved ones and still those who are hurting this year. So more than ever, the kind word and the kind gesture could be a lifeline, and in this year of all years, Christmas must be a community Christmas.
I take this opportunity to thank my constituents in Strangford for electing me. I have a privilege and an honour in being their MP. I serve everyone in that constituency, even though I am a member of the Democratic Unionist party. I love helping people, and I always have in my years as a councillor and in the Northern Ireland Assembly, and then when elevated to this place. I want to wish every right hon. and hon. Member in this House a safe and merry Christmas and a happy new year.

Jonathan Gullis: I just want to say to the hon. Gentleman, as a new colleague in this House, thank you for constantly reaching out and offering your support to all of us who are new to this place, across the House. What a tremendous gentleman you are.

Jim Shannon: The hon. Gentleman is most kind. It is a privilege to make new friends in this House, and it is a privilege to have the opportunity to encourage each other. I believe that my job in this House is to encourage each person. When I come to Adjournment debates, Members say, “Why do you always come?” Well, I actually come to support the person who is doing the  Adjournment debate. I come to give them encouragement so that they can feel encouraged in what they do, and it is very important that we do that.
I want to convey to you, Madam Deputy Speaker, that I wish you, and the other Deputy Speakers and Mr Speaker, a very merry Christmas and happy new year. You deserve it. You have stuck up with me this whole year—well done! If there was a medal handed out for it, you would get the medal, along with everybody else.
I also want to say thanks to my staff, particularly Wendy, my manageress in the office; Naomi—who is the lady who is very much under pressure? The PPS—who writes the speeches for me, and as we all know, she is pretty busy; and Yvonne, Betty, Ashley, Christina and Billy. I thank all my staff for all they do.
I think perhaps I can have one more minute, Madam Deputy Speaker. [Laughter.] Sorry, but I want to finish with “A Christmas Prayer” by Robert Louis Stevenson. I studied Robert Louis Stevenson in literature class at school many years ago, and I have just found this Christmas prayer, so I will finish with this:
“Loving Father,
help us remember the birth of Jesus,
that we may share in the song of the angels,
the gladness of the shepherds,
and worship of the wise men.
Close the door of hate
and open the door of love all over the world.
Let kindness come with every gift
and good desires with every greeting.
Deliver us from evil by the blessing
which Christ brings,
and teach us to be merry with clear hearts.
May the Christmas morning
make us happy to be thy children,
and Christmas evening bring us to our beds
with grateful thoughts,
forgiving and forgiven,
for Jesus’ sake.
Amen.”

Fiona Bruce: Before I start, can I wholeheartedly endorse the expression of appreciation for the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon)? It has been my great pleasure to work with him on a number of issues, especially freedom of religion or belief. He is an inspiring leader on that issue, in particular in his role as chair of the all-party parliamentary group.
As my term of office serving as chair of the Conservative party human rights commission comes to an end shortly, I would like to pay tribute to all who over the past few years have contributed to our inquiries and reports, in particular the brave people who have given evidence to us, many at personal risk, and who either themselves or through their families have suffered greatly, often at the hands of their own Governments. I want to put on record my thanks and respect to them. Many are named in our reports. Without them, we as commissioners could not have highlighted the human rights concerns in those reports.
The commission’s reports include a 2016 report on human rights in China, 2013 to 2016, entitled “The Darkest Moment”—sadly, now a misnomer. That was  followed later that year by a report on forced organ harvesting in China. Under a year later, there was a report on human rights in Russia today. In 2019, there was a report on China’s Confucius Institutes, as well as a report entitled “The Limits of Consent on Human Trafficking and Modern Slavery and their Impact on Prostitution in the UK”. This year, we have held nine sessions to inform a further report, which we will shortly publish on human rights in China 2016 to 2020, entitled, sadly, “The Darkness Deepens”.
Promoting and protecting freedom and human dignity should be at the heart of foreign policy. The Conservative party human rights commission was set up by my right hon. Friend the Member for North Somerset (Dr Fox) to highlight international human rights concerns; inform, advise and enhance the party’s foreign policy; and ensure that fundamental human rights are kept high on the political agenda. A number of Members of Parliament have been the chair of the Conservative party human rights commission since its creation, but the deputy chair has throughout this 15-year period been the same person, Benedict Rogers, to whom I pay particular tribute. I want to put on record my profound thanks and respect to him. He has not only carried the bulk of the commission’s work throughout this entire period, organising witness sessions and producing the first draft of most of our reports, but he has also travelled to dozens—probably hundreds, I have lost count—of places across the world, often at great personal danger. He has been refused entry to one place and arrested and detained in others, meeting directly with those subject to human rights abuses to ensure that our reports are as reliable and authentic as they can be. I know that my respect for Ben is shared by very many parliamentarians in both Houses, and it has been a true privilege to work closely with him in this role.
Four years ago, the Conservative party human rights commission was a canary in the coalmine in Westminster, calling attention to China’s human rights crisis almost as a lone voice—in fact, an urgent question I raised  in 2015 prompted a furore from some parts of Government—although, of course, many other courageous voices, such as Bob Fu of ChinaAid, have been raising such concerns for years well beyond Westminster. Today, it is heartening that the Conservative party human rights commissioners are but one of many such voices here in the UK Parliament, as yesterday’s urgent question on the Uyghurs demonstrated—including voices from within the current Government. We welcome that.
As mentioned, we will shortly be launching a further report expressing concerns on the deepening deterioration of human rights in China, which we hope will serve to continue to highlight these issues and inform further debate—a debate it is critical we have if we are to better understand how, as parliamentarians, we can help to shape a new international order in which the value  of human rights and human dignity, the rule of law, democracy, international treaty promises, and freedom of expression, association and religion or belief are better promoted and defended. It is heartening to  me how, over my 10 years in this House, expressions  of concern by parliamentary colleagues on these  issues have noticeably increased, and with impact and effect, not least as we have seen recently with regard to Hong Kong.
Sadly, any such impact cannot yet be said to have happened with regard to the deteriorating human rights situation in China. Among the most dramatic evidence of the decline in human rights there since our commission’s last inquiry in 2016 are the violations of the right to freedom of religion or belief. These have become even more egregious, widespread and systematic, according to evidence received by the Conservative party human rights commission this year. As we now know, some of the most egregious violations of freedom of religion or belief affect the Uyghurs, and they encompass an almost total denial of every basic human right. They include their own Government’s attacks on the Uighur identity, culture and religion, the breaking up of families, the destruction of thousands of mosques and the recent heart-rending sight of people being loaded on to trains to be transported to prison camps with purpose-built factories alongside them. This was all too reminiscent of the holocaust.
However, it is by no means only the Uyghurs who are being persecuted. For every major religious community in China today—Christians, both Protestant and Catholic, Muslims, Buddhists, practitioners of Falun Gong and others—the situation has become more restricted. Believers across the faiths have been arrested, imprisoned, tortured and even killed in connection with their religion or belief. There are other Muslim groups as well as the Uyghurs in Xinjiang that are affected, as well as the Buddhists in Tibet. Violations against Christians have intensified with the imprisonment of pastors and the desecration or destruction of hundreds of  churches.
Accounts to the independent China tribunal, chaired by Sir Geoffrey Nice, QC, which delivered its final judgment in March this year on the persecution of Falun Gong practitioners, were truly heart-searing. We are told that persecution by way of forced organ removal is taking place on an industrial scale. It is almost too horrible for the human mind to comprehend. Human beings are being cut open while still alive, without anaesthetic, for their kidneys, livers, hearts, lungs, corneas and skin to be removed and turned into commodities for sale.
We, as commissioners on the Conservative party human rights commission, have found that human rights concerns do not always come neatly packaged and presented. Engaging can be messy, awkward and risky, and speaking truth to power is not comfortable, often as much for the hearer as for the speaker. So, why raise these concerns? It is because, whether we agree with their beliefs or not, these are fellow human beings who are being affected. It is because we should respect the worth of every human being, and because every created individual has value. It is because once we have heard of these things, we should not stay silent. As the holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel said:
“Whoever listens to a witness, becomes a witness”.
We speak simply because we should, and because, however distant the sufferings of those who hurt might be, we share in their common humanity. In this House we have been granted the profound privilege of having voices that can resonate across the world, and we must use them to speak out on behalf of the most vulnerable, afflicted and oppressed.

Royal Assent

Rosie Winterton: I have to notify the House, in accordance with the Royal Assent Act 1967, that Her Majesty has signified her Royal Assent to the following Acts:
Taxation (Post-transition Period) Act 2020
United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020
Trade (Disclosure of Information) Act 2020.

Christmas Adjournment

Debate resumed.

Sir David Amess: It is a pleasure to follow such a moving speech by my hon. Friend the Member for Congleton (Fiona Bruce). This has been an absolutely rotten year—the worst that I can ever remember—and I think every one of us will be glad to see the back of it, but before we adjourn for the Christmas recess, there are a number of points I wish to make.
Many of my constituents were absolutely fed up with C2C’s reorganisation of the timetable, resulting in people being crammed together. This was not good enough, but I hope to see further improvements under the new chief executive, Ben Ackroyd.
Southend airport is wonderful, and regional airports need more support, but my constituents are getting fed up with being woken up in the wee hours of the morning by Amazon flights. It really is not acceptable to be woken up in the wee hours of the morning in that way. I was very disappointed to learn that Arriva UK Bus has withdrawn the new eco-friendly service in Southend and replaced it with old polluting buses. That is ridiculous and needs to be changed.
Southend United have been having a tough old time. We were, I think, bottom by about nine points, but I am delighted to tell the House we have just beaten Scunthorpe and we are now only bottom by one. So things are improving, and perhaps we can celebrate with a new stadium.
Like all other hon. Members, I wish to congratulate Southend clinical commissioning group, the staff at Southend University Hospital and the director of public health at Southend-on-Sea Borough Council for all their hard work in co-ordinating the local response to covid-19. Both the hospital and our local ambulance service have been absolutely wonderful, as all hon. Members should say; my goodness, they deserve a wonderful Christmas. I was very disappointed when Nazareth House closed, but I am delighted to say that it is now being used as a coronavirus testing centre, so the ethos of caring still remains there.
With the Belvedere on Leigh Cliffs, too much money has been wasted on a project that is a magnet for drug abuse and antisocial behaviour. That is just getting worse, but I praise the wonderful work of Leigh-on-Sea Town Council, under the chairmanship of Councillor Paul Gilson, who has been working with local community groups such as Friends of Love Leigh Cliffs and Essex police to tackle antisocial behaviour in Leigh and along the cliffs.
On roads and parking, we really need to do something about the quality of the roads in Southend, and the local council should work even harder to reduce speeding. I applaud the fact that they are providing free parking in the town centre over Christmas, but we need better signage.
I am delighted that my constituent Lakhbir Sandhu, who was imprisoned in Czechoslovakia for many months, is now free and celebrating his freedom with constituents, thanks to the wonderful work of the British ambassador and a wonderful legal team.
We have a marvellous hospice in Southend, Fair Havens, which is really under pressure at the moment. I congratulate all the staff there. I always associate the wonderful Salvation Army with Christmas, although it works 365 days a year, and I look forward to the progress of its Project Malachi, creating temporary accommodation for people experiencing homelessness.
It was crazy to close our churches earlier in the year, frankly. They were so careful about social distancing and all that. That must never happen again—people who go to church should be allowed to do so.
As chairman of the all-party parliamentary group on endometriosis, I was pleased that we launched our report in October. It has made a big difference for people. My hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock (Jackie Doyle-Price) is vice-chairman of the group, and we want to ensure that the voices of the 1.5 million ladies who suffer from this illness are heard.
Unfortunately, one of my constituents lost her granddaughter, Maisie Tothill—this is terrible to cope with—to sudden unexpected death as a result of epilepsy. The Tothills have started a charity in her name, the Maisie Tothill Foundation. SUDEP Action recently published its report on sudden unexpected death in epilepsy, and I hope that the Government will act on its recommendations.
Southend’s HARP does a wonderful job in reducing rough sleeping in Southend. Some 80% of those who were temporarily housed in bed and breakfasts have now found long-term accommodation. They really are pulling their lives around. I also praise Prost8, a wonderful local charity, and particularly its founder Paul Sayer. Last Friday, I welcomed—socially distanced, of course, Madam Deputy Speaker—a number of charities, including the citizens advice bureau. They have had a very difficult year, but they have absolutely stepped up to the mark.
Our police locally are wonderful, and I am delighted to say that Southend has seen a 10.3% reduction in crime year on year and a 12.8% reduction in victim-based crime. Essex County Fire and Rescue Service has done a wonderful job in inspecting all the high-rise buildings with cladding over the past few months, and I am glad to hear that low-rise blocks are also going to be inspected and remedial work recommended where necessary.
Unfortunately, for obvious reasons, we could not physically hold our annual centenarians’ tea party. We did it virtually, and that was a wonderful experience, but I hope we will be able to reinstate it next year, and we are going to do our best to once again get into the Guinness World Records.
Now, on city status—[Hon. Members: “Hear, hear!”] There should be a city-status competition for the Queen’s jubilee in 2022, so that Southend can become a city. She is probably sick to death of seeing statues of herself, but I think there should be yet another statue of the Queen in the vicinity of Buckingham Palace and the Palace of Westminster, to celebrate the fact that not only is it her platinum jubilee but she is the longest-serving Head of State in the world.
I have had a number of ambassadorial meetings by Zoom this year, and I praise the work of the ambassadors to the Philippines and the Maldives, which is in a far better place now.
I pay tribute to the wonderful work of Steve Tinning with the charity Safe Passage. I am grateful to the Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department, my hon. Friend the Member for Croydon South (Chris Philp), for arranging a meeting.
I am delighted that the Government have at long last announced a ban on live animal exports in England and Wales. The next thing on the list will be to stop the farrowing of sows in crates, which is very cruel. Thankfully, zoos can currently remain open in certain tiers.
Remembrance Day and VJ Day were very muted this year. Perhaps rather ambitiously, I organised a live VJ Day broadcast—I am not sure that I will ever do that again; it is much better to record it. We celebrated both events and I hope we will be able to do much more next year. Peter Egan narrated the history of the conflict in the far east and it was absolutely wonderful.
Chase High School is a wonderful school in my constituency, and I was delighted to be there to see the opening of the Geoff Nash building.
I have one constituent who has been on and on at me about the relationship between coronavirus deaths and medicines such as steroids, which, according to this constituent, can lower the immune system and make infections more likely. I ask my hon. Friend the Minister to make sure that we get a reply from the Department of Health and Social Care on that.
The high street, and particularly independent shops, have had an incredibly difficult time. I welcomed the opening of a new shop called Balloonacy. We should all try to shop locally.
This year we lost a wonderful woman and a national treasure: Dame Vera Lynn. I am in constant contact with her daughter Ginny, and there are all sorts of people behind this project. I know that statues are controversial, but we must get a statue of Dame Vera Lynn. There are very few statues of women and it has to be in the best place possible so that future generations can enjoy and appreciate the wonderful work that she did.
I offer you, Madam Deputy Speaker, the team under the Speaker and everyone who works here a very happy Christmas and a far better 2021.

Richard Holden: I apologise to you, Madam Deputy Speaker, for being slightly late. To my hon. Friend the Member for Southend West (Sir David Amess), I say it is always great to hear his speeches and the tours of his constituency and, like many other Members, I wish that Southend is granted city status at some point.
It has been a very difficult year for many in North West Durham; however, they have also had a different year with a very different new MP. I have fully taken on some of the major challenges that have faced my constituency over the past few months. I am delighted that Shotley Bridge Hospital is one of the 48 hospitals that are going to get Government support, so we will be seeing a new community hospital. There is also extra money for a feasibility study for a “Consett to the Tyne” public transport link. Those two major local projects will really help to level up and transform my community, and hopefully help us to build back better beyond covid.
On a local level, I have been concentrating on the motor homes tax, and I managed to work with the Chancellor to get it reduced earlier this year, thereby saving £5,000 off the cost of a new motor home, many of which are built in my North West Durham constituency—

Jonathan Gullis: You are an expensive MP.

Richard Holden: Indeed I am—and I make no apology for it.
The legislation on relief for public lavatories is currently going through the House of Lords, and I hope to see its journey continue. I am honoured to work with colleagues on the all-party parliamentary group on local democracy to see the relief finally secured. It will have a particularly beneficial impact for parish and town councils throughout the country, saving them £8 million a year.
Access to cash is something that I have been working on as a member of the Public Accounts Committee. In my constituency we have managed to save the cash machine at the post office at Billy Row, enabling that community to probably keep its local shop, and in Moorside there has been a move from a machine that charges £1.99 a go to one that is free, helping to put £20,000 a year back into the pockets of people in one of the most deprived wards in the constituency.
As far as casework goes, several things have really mattered a lot to me this year. One of them has been working with the excellent Baroness Stedman-Scott in the other place. She has really helped out a couple of my constituents, particularly with personal independence payment assessments and reassessments. They have been going on for such a long time, and we have seen really good progress there, with some constituents seeing big payments that were backdated for several years. We are really helping them out.
As far as private Member’s Bills go, last week I introduced a ten-minute rule Bill to ban virginity testing and I will do everything I possibly can to get the Government to give it a bit of space at some point, or perhaps to attach it to another Bill. I have been delighted to help out my right hon. Friend the Member for Chesham and Amersham (Dame Cheryl Gillan) with her private Member’s Bill on testing for psychoactive substances in prisons. That is a really important measure that has, I know, been welcomed by many prison officers who work in Frankland and other prisons near my constituency, because of the effect those substances have on the inmates. That is another very important piece of legislation.
Next year, I hope that we will see some more sunlit uplands than this year has provided. I know that many of my local pubs and hospitality businesses have really suffered during the lockdown, and they want the restrictions ended as soon as possible. I know that that can happen only with the vaccine programme roll-out, and I have been delighted to see the Government put their shoulder to the wheel on that, getting preferential access to a huge number of vaccines. I hope that the Oxford vaccine can be rolled out as quickly as possible when it is safe to do so, because that will make a massive difference because of the ease of distributing it in care settings across the country.
I want to mention a few things that I will be looking forward to next year. Nationally, I hope to make a bit of a push on mental health, particularly for young people. After the year we have had, the impact of that and of not being able to see friends, family and relatives has been a concern for many people locally.
Willington, Tow Law and Crook really need some good news on the towns and high street funds side of things. Crook has had more than a decade of being ignored and having services removed—it saw its local swimming pool removed almost 10 years ago—and it is important that it sees some proper local investment. The post office in Wolsingham has been earmarked for potential closure, and I am going to work with local people to see whether we can find somebody to take that on.
The Christmas lights in Consett this year were an absolute disgrace. The council seemed to manage to put out cones as quickly as they could all over the town centre when it came to easing the lockdown, yet when it came to putting up a few fairy lights to brighten the town centre ahead of Christmas it seems to have totally failed. I hope that the council will work with me next year to make Consett, Crook and Willington town centres look a bit brighter. I am delighted to be going to Wolsingham tomorrow to open the Christmas lights.
On the particular issue of covid-19 and hospitality, next year I would like the Government to reflect on what a hard year this has been for the hospitality sector, particularly our local pubs and brewers. I will certainly join colleagues on all sides to put pressure on for a reduction in beer duty and a change to the taper system to allow small breweries to expand without a massive tax hit.
Finally, I want to mention two things that have affected lots of different parts of my constituency in lots of different ways. The first is planning. There has been a huge amount of talk about it here, but we need to see our towns and communities enabled by large unitary authorities such as mine to come forward with proper neighbourhood plans that give them a proper voice. In particular, I am thinking of the High West Road in Crook and the Medomsley Bank development. There is also concern about the possibility of a waste-to-energy incinerator in Consett. Secondly, speeding is a huge problem in so many of my towns and villages. It would be really nice to have the council work with me on getting some buffer zones, particularly for our rural villages and small towns, to make those communities safer for everybody.

Aaron Bell: It is a pleasure to follow my hon. Friend the Member for North West Durham (Mr Holden), who has had such an impressive first year in this place and, clearly, from the tour de force that he has just given us, in his constituency.
It is a year ago to the day that we first assembled in this place as new Members. As my hon. Friend the Member for Southend West (Sir David Amess) said, it has been a pretty rotten year, but I would like to thank everybody in the House for all they have done to enable the House to continue in the way that it has. That includes you, Madam Deputy Speaker, Mr Speaker and all your teams, the Clerks, the Doorkeepers, the catering teams and, particularly, the audiovisual team, who have  had to make so many efforts this year to enable us to continue. It would be remiss of me not to pay particular tribute to the staff of the Science and Technology Committee, on which I sit, who have done so much work at very short notice on the coronavirus pandemic this year.
It has been a very difficult year in Newcastle-under-Lyme. This morning, we learned that we remain in tier 3. We have made huge strides in Newcastle. Our rate was 470 a month ago, and it is down to 200 now. It is still too high, but I pay tribute to everyone for their hard work on that, particularly the staff at Royal Stoke University Hospital, who are under so much pressure. I hope that we will be able to get to tier 2 in the new year. I pay tribute to the Government for all they have done to support people economically through the pandemic, but I gently ask the Deputy Chief Whip to get a message to the Chancellor that we want to see even more help to get our high street and our hospitality industry back on their feet.
I would like to take this opportunity to speak about a matter of great importance to many of my constituents: Walley’s Quarry landfill in Silverdale in my constituency. It is a former clay extraction quarry that was converted to landfill use. It is not located in the countryside; it is in a built-up area. There are residential properties within around 100 metres of the site boundary in multiple directions. Lots of residents in the local area report being plagued by the pungent odour, even inside their homes. It is comfortably the biggest issue that I receive correspondence about in my mailbox day in, day out, particularly when the weather conditions are just right—or, as the residents would see it, just wrong. It was the most talked about local issue on the doorstep in the election campaign.
This landfill should never have been permitted. The Environment Agency, in the discussions I have had with it, has acknowledged that it is in a particularly unusual location. The local borough and county council objected to the original application in 1997, but they were overruled by the then Secretary of State, Lord Prescott, who is now in the other place. Perhaps this is symptomatic of how the red wall used to be taken for granted. With the constituency having a Labour majority of 17,000, perhaps he concluded that there was not much political danger in approving this manifestly inappropriate use of the quarry. Well, Labour does not have a majority of 17,000 any more.
The lockdowns in recent months have only thrown the issue into sharper relief. People working from home or confined to their houses because they have been shielding have been surrounded by bad smells, unable to enjoy their gardens during the hot weather in the summer or open their windows when they need to sleep at night. I raised this matter in Westminster Hall in February, and residents wrote to me about being unable to hang their washing outside for fear of the smell and feeling sick, gagging or more as a result of the odour. Newcastle cemetery is directly opposite the landfill, and, as you can imagine, this issue has ruined many funerals. Many people who come to visit their dearly departed loved ones find that the odour in the vicinity detracts from what should be a special moment.
I have tabled a number of written parliamentary questions about this to get more data and more information from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural  Affairs. I got a response today from the Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for Taunton Deane (Rebecca Pow), who I thank for her engagement. It says:
“Although no landfill will ever be completely odour free, the level and type of odour arising from such operations should not be causing annoyance.”
Well, from the figures I have been given, it is clearly causing annoyance. In October, the Environment Agency received 992 reports of odour in the whole country, 225 of which—23%—were about Walley’s Quarry in my constituency. In September, the figure was 371, or 17%. That is clearly indicative of the annoyance that it is causing.
The smell has been much worse in recent weeks; I think it is to do with the atmospheric conditions, although it may be to do with the operations themselves. I have encountered the smell myself on a number of occasions. I have smelt it when coming out of my office on the high street of Newcastle, which is more than 2 miles away. It is obviously not good for the high street to have that odour, and it is clearly affecting the quality of life of a great many of my constituents. It is serious. It is unacceptable that we are asking people to put up with it. I am also struck by the fact that the guidance about Christmas bubbles says that people should have a well ventilated Christmas. Well, it is pretty much impossible for people in Silverdale, Knutton or Poolfields to have a well ventilated Christmas. Turkey and sprouts can cause bad smells, but not on the level of this landfill.
Earlier this week, residents were holding yet another protest outside the gates of the landfill site. That demonstrates the helplessness that people feel and the failure, in their view, of the Environment Agency to respond appropriately. It has shaken public confidence in our agencies and our government. Residents want action to be taken and they feel that they are being fobbed off.
I will mention a couple of aspects of the law in the time I have available. There is a 0 to 6 scale for measuring odour, which is entirely subjective. People are asked to ring in and say how bad it is—“Is it a two, a three, or a four?” This is exactly the same scale that the Environment Agency then uses when it sends people out into the area on odour tours to say how bad it is. Understandably, this does not engender public confidence. We need to do more scientific monitoring. Scientific monitoring exercises have been done, but we need to be monitoring hydrogen sulphide, which causes most of the problem, and the methane as well. It has got to the point where residents are purchasing their own monitoring equipment, which I find absolutely ridiculous. The Environment Agency needs to get into the 21st century and start using proper monitoring tools rather than a subjective scale, which undoubtedly causes a great deal of—

Jonathan Gullis: Scrap the 0 to 6.

Aaron Bell: Yes, scrap the 0 to 6, as my hon. Friend and parliamentary neighbour says.
Looking back, at the end of my first year as the Member of Parliament for Newcastle-under-Lyme, it is my greatest frustration that there has been so little progress on this issue, though I accept that everybody has been entirely preoccupied with coronavirus. The Environment Agency, when I have met it in recent months, is aware of the problem and how it affects my  constituents, because it receives these complaints, but it seems to be either hidebound by the law or unable and unwilling to tackle the problem seriously. I understand the operator’s position—it is a commercial operator—but I do not think that it is willing to admit the scale of the problem. It does not, I think, engage properly with complaints, and it has attacked me personally for raising the complaints of my constituents. Perhaps understandably, it repeats that it is operating a compliant site, and that is undoubtedly so case where it is at the moment.
In conclusion, all that my constituents want—particularly the ones in that area—for Christmas is a solution to this. They want a solution to the smell that is plaguing their lives. I do not think it is acceptable that we ask people to live like this. Whether we need to change the law or get fresh monitoring, which I have called for from the Environment Agency, we need to get some progress on this in 2021, because it is unacceptable and it has been going on for far too long.

David Johnston: Before I talk about the many things I want to talk about today, I will mention two other things quickly. First, I pass up no opportunity to mention the need to reopen Grove station in my constituency, which my constituents have wanted for over 40 years. Thousands more houses have gone into that area, with very congested roads. I have told my constituents that I will keep going and going until we are successful with this.
Secondly, I want to mention is a man called Dave Wells. He got to the final of “MasterChef” this week. He is a Didcot resident, and the whole of Didcot is hugely proud of him for getting that far. He did not win, unfortunately, but, as we know, “MasterChef” is a big deal. Over 5 million people watched the final, which I think, Mr Deputy Speaker, is just shy of the number that will be watching us right now on the Parliament channel. It is a hugely proud moment for the people of Didcot, and I have been exchanging messages with him to try to get his new restaurant in the constituency somewhere. I am agnostic about where, whether it is Didcot, Wallingford, Faringdon, Wantage or any of the villages I represent, but let us get it somewhere, because I think that would be another welcome attraction to my constituency.
The first main thing I want to talk about is Royal Mail. Our postmen and women have worked incredibly hard, including throughout the lockdown period, but a few weeks ago, I started to get a regular stream of emails every day from constituents whose mail was not being delivered. This was regular mail, such as letters, magazines and birthday cards. There was one couple whose 65th wedding anniversary cards had not arrived. It seems to me that if they can make 65 years of marriage, they deserve to have their cards arrive on time. Even more seriously, hospital appointments were being missed because this mail was not arriving.
It is clear that postmen and women have worked really hard, but I called a meeting with Royal Mail last week. Something is clearly not going right with the service at the moment. It is a busy time, there have been staff shortages and there are additional constraints because of covid and the need to restrict the number of people in Royal Mail buildings. I was interested to hear from  Royal Mail that it characterises what has happened as its having gone from a letter service delivering parcels to a parcel service delivering letters. Apparently, had I been able to visit the mail rooms this year, as I know Members of this House do every year, I would have seen everything being delivered by Royal Mail, including very large TVs, but also, as I understand my right hon. Friend the Member for Maidenhead (Mrs May) saw on her visit, washing machines. Clearly something is going on with the way Royal Mail is operating that means people are not getting their regular post. It is very distressing to them. Constituents of mine are still reporting a problem, and we need to get to the bottom of what that is, because in the new year the price of first-class stamps will go up 12%, and I do not think there will be a 12% increase in the quality of service that our constituents receive.
The second main thing I want to talk about are health services in my constituency, which has two aspects to it. The first is Wantage Community Hospital, which was closed in 2016 because legionella bacteria were found. My constituents expected that closure to be temporary, but, as the House might guess, that hospital has still not reopened. That is a cause of distress to constituents, who very much loved the local community hospital. They are fearful that perhaps it will never reopen, or that perhaps the site might be sold off.
I have regular conversations with local health leaders about the hospital, and I do not believe they have any intention to see it permanently closed or, indeed, to try and sell it off. They make the case that probably what the hospital needs is to offer different services from what it was offering before it closed. That is a case for them to make, and the decision making has been delayed again because of covid, but my constituents do deserve resolution as soon as possible.
The second key aspect of health services that I want to talk about is health services in the inner Didcot area. We have three patient participation groups in Didcot, and their chairs do a great job. They have calculated that in terms of the pressure on patient numbers, the population of Didcot has increased by 38% in five years, yet we have no new surgeries. That raises one of the regular problems of house building.
My constituency has had thousands and thousands of new houses. As I have said before in this place, most people are not opposed to house building. Although they may not like house building directly outside their window, most people are not opposed to it; they just want to know that housing is high quality, does the right things by the environment, is genuinely affordable and, importantly, is matched by the infrastructure that the growing population needs, because thousands more houses are due to go into this area. We had a big development at Great Western Park, which again had no new GP surgery coming with it, despite the best efforts of the three PPG chairs and people such as Councillor Ian Snowdon. The current GP surgeries are bursting at the seams, and we need some form of new health hub in Didcot that relieves the pressure on GP appointments, but also provides a wider range of health services, given that the population of this area will continue to grow.
The final thing I want to talk about, as a number of Members have, is what a year it has been. It has been an awful year for everybody, and it has been worse for  those who have lost a job, lost a business or, even worse, lost a loved one. I think there are few things we can say to offer real condolences to those people, although I offer them here today.
I know that, as we go into 2021, we will still be fighting this virus; more people will lose their jobs, their businesses, and indeed their lives; we will all be facing awful economic circumstances. Yet we got through this year—the country got through it. We saw tremendous effort, energy and achievements by our public services, not least in health and education, and by our private services—politicians generally default to public services, but let us not forget all the private services, such as the shops that remained open and kept serving us, and the great innovation by many of our business. There was also a tremendous community response, where people stepped up to serve their neighbours in whatever way they could. I saw that from Wallingford to Shrivenham in my constituency, and I know that every Member of the House saw it in their own constituency.
I am hugely proud of Britain and what it has achieved this year, and hugely proud of the British people and everything they have done, despite what an awful year it has been and despite all that they are going to be facing. With the vaccine and the other positive developments, I think we can look forward to a better 2021. I wish every Member of this House, everyone who works here and everyone who works anywhere else a happy Christmas and a very good new year.

Jonathan Gullis: I start by congratulating my hon. Friend the Member for Wantage (David Johnston) on his superb speech, and adding my cheers of “Merry Christmas!” to you, Mr Deputy Speaker, all Members across the House, and, most important, all the staff who work across the parliamentary estate. They go above and beyond, and I am grateful for all the support they have given me in my first year as a Member of Parliament.
I send a big “Merry Christmas!” to the people of Stoke-on-Trent North, Kidsgrove and Talke. When Circuit’s “Messages of Joy” campaign conducted research to determine the kindest city in the UK—shock, horror!—Stoke came out on top. But it was no shock or surprise for me or the people of that fine city. We are a resolute, spirited and doughty group of individuals who believe that community must come first. I praise our health and care heroes at the Royal Stoke University Hospital, Haywood Walk-in Centre and across our local NHS, and thank them for the sacrifices they have made every day to keep us safe. My family and I will forever be indebted to them, particularly because in the midst of the crisis the maternity team at the Royal Stoke helped to deliver Amelia, Nkita’s and my first child. We are delighted to be celebrating our daughter’s first Christmas this year.
I want to say a big thank you to Staffordshire police, Staffordshire fire and rescue, teachers and support staff, supermarket workers, Royal Mail staff, bus drivers and the many other key workers who have worked in the most challenging conditions. Across Stoke-on-Trent, Kidsgrove and Talke, they have risen to the challenge. I also want to give a big shout-out to the amazing voluntary sector, whether it is Men Unite, the Pop Up Pantry at St Michael’s in Chell, VAST, the Salvation Army in  Kidsgrove, Tunstall and Smallthorne, Swan Bank Methodist church, Number 11 and Team Chatterley, to name but a few.
There are two individuals who I think deserve a special shout-out. One is Carol Shanahan, co-owner  of Port Vale football club and founder of the Hubb Foundation. Throughout the crisis, she and her organisation have served 250,000 meals to over 30,000 families across the city of Stoke-on-Trent. That is to be commended. What I have enjoyed the most about Carol’s work with the Hubb is that the foundation is now providing slow cookers, with ingredients for one meal a day for 12 weeks and a series of recipe cards, with the aim of ensuring that families can benefit independently when the support ends. Stoke-on-Trent City Council has invested £23,000 in the scheme, which is extremely welcome.
I also want to give a big shout-out to an absolute community champion. The history books may not have his name, but I hope he will be able to look to this place to see it written down. Rich Stephenson-Evans works at Kidsgrove Tesco, and he is the community champion. He has been in that role for many years—since well before I arrived on the scene in Stoke-on-Trent, Kidsgrove and Talke. He is one of the true unsung heroes in our community. If ever a man—or person, sorry; I should say that in this day and age—deserved an honour from Her Majesty, it is Rich Stephenson-Evans. He has gone above and beyond delivering food from Tesco. It is amazing that there is anything to buy in the Tesco in Kidsgrove, because he normally swipes the shelves clean. He has delivered across the area, to all those charities I named, but he has also helped those charities get £500 or £1,000 grants from Tesco. As my hon. Friend the Member for Wantage said, we must always acknowledge that the private sector has played a huge part in helping us to tackle covid and rightly deserves as much praise as our public sector.
I would like to give a special shout-out to Lainey Evans, who is in year 5 at St Wilfrid’s Catholic Academy and was the winner of my Christmas card competition. It is a superb design with a bottle kiln and the Angel  of Burslem above it, which I think is wonderful. The runners-up were Isla in year 4, William in nursery and Adam in year 4. A big thank you to them for taking part. With over 500 entries, it was superb to see.
I want to put on the record my plea to the Minister on behalf of the superb Titanic Brewery, which is in dire need of additional Government support. Once pubs are closed, brewers have no way of selling, apart from the odd bottle that they can sell from their factory shop. That does not make up for the money that is being lost in what would be a boom season with Christmas, so that additional support is needed.
Ceramic manufacturers also need support. They are part of the supply chain into the hospitality sector, and they have seen a big difference between their 2019 and 2020 orders. They are asking for the VAT reduction to be extended to them, at the manufacturing end, and they are also asking for business rates relief. While that will not save every job, it will make a huge difference to making sure that these giants—Churchill China, Steelite and Burleigh Pottery—go on to exist ever more in my local community.
On transportation, north Staffordshire and Stoke-on-Trent already have very good strategic transport links. We have the M6, A500 and A50 serving the city, and the  rail journey to London is a little over one hour and 30 minutes. But now we have our £29 million from the transforming cities fund, which is absolutely superb. It will have a huge impact on Stoke-on-Trent station, but it will also bring investment in our bus services.
I presented a petition in the House the other day, having missed my previous slot—Mr Deputy Speaker was kind enough not to embarrass me in public—on the Stoke-Leek line. Over 1,000 residents have signed that petition, and I am working with my right hon. Friend the Member for Staffordshire Moorlands (Karen Bradley) and my hon. Friends the Members for Stoke-on-Trent Central (Jo Gideon) and for Stoke-on-Trent South (Jack Brereton) to deliver this important piece of rail infrastructure, which will bring connectivity and help our economy. Most importantly, it will potentially serve the town of Milton, which is a superb little town with great local independent retailers, and support some local schools. It will therefore potentially take traffic off our roads, which is a huge issue.
Longport station also deserves a shout-out. Sadly, the Department for Transport rejected its element of the transforming cities fund because footfall was not high enough in the original criteria. I have accepted and understood that, but I am now going to set up a Longport station promotion group with key local stakeholders interested in driving greater use of Longport station. Now Stoke station has that key interchange, thanks to the £29 million from the transforming cities fund, feeder stations such as Longport will be increasingly important in Stoke-on-Trent’s public transport revolution. I am also convinced that Longport can and should be a better-appreciated rail destination in its own right, because we have Middleport pottery just up the road, Westport Lake Park and the mother town of Burslem—all superb places to visit.
It would be remiss of me not to mention Silicon Stoke and Chatterley Whitfield very briefly. We now have the Silicon Stoke board at Stoke-on-Trent City Council; Councillor Abi Brown has teamed up with me. We have NHS Digital joining that board, and many other local and national stakeholders. We reckon that the 104 km of full fibre that has been installed in the ground across the city will potentially unlock £625 million in the local economy. I want to set up a game school—a regional free school for 14 to 18-year-olds with part-selective entry, based on talent and commitment to developing specialist skills in differing elements of game design, creation, production and marketing.
Finally, the sleeping giant that is Chatterley Whitfield is the largest complete quarry site in the whole of Europe. It is time for an industrial heritage park. The people at Historic England have listened to me badger them time and again. The consultants at Feilden Clegg Bradley Studios are now leading a 10-year vision plan. We had our first meeting with key stakeholders. I got £22,500 out of Historic England as well, with the Friends of Chatterley Whitfield and Stoke-on-Trent City Council. It is time to make sure that these great sleeping giants are appreciated as part of our industrial heritage.

Nigel Evans: To resume his seat no later than 4.32 pm, Mr Tom Hunt.

Tom Hunt: Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker; I do not plan to go on that long, but who knows? Me and my hon. Friend the Member for Stoke-on-Trent North (Jonathan Gullis) have a very good relationship, but we often vie for the same limelight on similar issues.
It has been a remarkable year: going into 2020, I do not think any of us could have predicted the challenges that were ahead. A huge number of my constituents have lost loved ones who they will never see again, and the virus continues to be a threat. A vast majority of my constituents continue to work hard to prevent the spread of the virus. The livelihoods of many of my constituents have been lost, and they continue to be incredibly anxious about what the future holds for them. There is not a single person in the country whose mental health has not been impacted, at least to some extent, by this, and I imagine all of us are in the same boat to some extent on that issue.
I was elected, along with my colleagues, last year. One of the key reasons why we were elected was to get Brexit done—to resolve the issue and move on—and I think the vast majority of people who voted for us last year to get Brexit done did so believing that they were electing a Prime Minister who would stand up for British interests, who would be resolute in doing so, and would not capitulate and accept a deal that would encumber us and tie our hands when it came to fully exploiting the benefits of Brexit. I think the Prime Minister is living up to that, and I welcome it. The Labour party talks about what was in the minds of voters when they voted for the Prime Minister; frankly, I find it quite extraordinary how all of a sudden, the Labour party has such a profound understanding of the motivations of voters, many of whom voted leave. For me, they voted to elect a Government that would deliver a proper Brexit, not a Brexit in name only, and that is exactly what this Government are doing.
With regard to covid-19, I was pleased to hear today that Ipswich would be remaining in tier 2. It was quite peculiar, because going into the second national lockdown, we had very low rates of covid. We were a long way below the national average, and we were one of 18 local authority areas that left the second national lockdown with rates increasing. That has continued in tier 2, but despite my concerns about the prevalence of the virus, particularly in those over the age of 65, I do think that keeping us in tier 2 was the right decision. I am glad that that decision has been made, and I am confident that the people of Ipswich will continue to work hard to make sure we can get to a better place with fewer restrictions at the first opportunity.
It is difficult to know where to stop thanking so many of my constituents, who have worked so hard. A huge number of my constituents work at Ipswich Hospital as nurses and doctors. They have risked their lives, and have literally gone above and beyond to save the lives of many of my constituents. I also thank the teachers who have gone to extraordinary lengths to continue providing education in incredibly challenging circumstances, and the police officers who never thought they were going into the police to start managing the distance between people, but have done so with dignity and in a professional way, and have got the balance just right. Turning to the charitable sector, we have never needed our charities  more than we do right now, yet at the same time the strain on their finances has never been so great. There is no better example of that than when I temporarily became a skinhead after shaving my hair off to support Age UK Suffolk, and then very sadly we found out, having raised around £3,000, that that was not enough. We lost Age UK Suffolk a number of weeks after that fundraising campaign, just when we needed it more than ever.
I spoke in my maiden speech about special educational needs, and said that it was probably the No. 1 reason why I got involved in politics. As a kid, I had dyslexia and dyspraxia. I was very fortunate to go to the school that I went to, which had not only the resources but the freedoms to tailor education around me, and all of a sudden I caught up. We need to do more as a country, because no child with special educational needs should be allowed to not achieve their full potential. I have become an associate governor at Sir Bobby Robson School, which is a new special school for those with social, emotional and mental health difficulties. We have another free school for those with language difficulties opening up as well, but we also need better provision in mainstream schools. We need to put more money into special educational needs. We need to do so for two reasons: first, because it is morally the right thing to do; and secondly, because as a society we cannot afford to lose their talents. Those with special educational needs are unconventional thinkers; they can be among the most creative thinkers. Given the right support, they can thrive, and we do not lose their talents, but given the wrong support, they often end up in our criminal justice system. I am pleased that the Education Committee has now launched an inquiry into prison education to look into that issue, among others.
The Orwell bridge, which I bang on about a lot, will hopefully be sorted out in the early new year, and the closures of the bridge that cost the local economy £1 million a day will stop. We have put in our submission for the town deal. We are going for £28 million. We were told it was for up to £25 million, but we thought, “Well, it’s Ipswich—we deserve £28 million”, so we have gone for that.
Another issue that needs sorting is cladding. A huge number of my constituents are leaseholders who have that uncertainty and anxiety hanging over them. I am pleased about the waking watch announcement today, but we need to go further.
I said last year in my maiden speech that it was the greatest thrill of my life to be elected as Member of Parliament for Ipswich. I believe it is the greatest town in this country. It has a football club that has had better days, but hopefully that can turn around soon. Obviously Portman Road will remain open as it is in a tier 2 area. The people of Ipswich are by and large, I think, decent, patriotic, hard-working and straight-speaking. I said to them when I got elected that I would be straight-speaking as well—that I would not dodge away from controversial issues but get in there and speak my mind. Sometimes not all my constituents might agree with what I say, and I might not always deliver what I want to deliver, but I will never be missing in action. I will always be in here, active, talking up the town that I am proud to represent and that I love and that I believe, despite the current challenges, has its best days ahead of it.
Thank you very much, Mr Deputy Speaker, thank you to all my colleagues who have helped me in my first year, and I look forward to the new year.

Chris Stephens: Let me join others, Mr Deputy Speaker, in wishing you and all parliamentary staff a good and restful Christmas.
This has been an excellent debate. I am becoming a veteran of these events. I was particularly struck by the number of Members who raised international issues, including issues of religious persecution. I, for one, believe that we should always discuss and raise these matters in this House.
A large number of topics were dealt with, some of great importance. We heard about digital exclusion, which we will have to deal with, the fact that Remembrance Day was not quite the occasion that it usually is, and of course Southend’s city status. Let me just say to the hon. Member for Southend West (Sir David Amess) that I am also supportive of this, but I hope that in 2021 we can reinstate flights from Southend to Glasgow. How good would that be? This year there was no mention of the rail service to Southend, so I do not know if it has improved, but perhaps it would be a good 2021 for the good people of Southend if we could reinstate flights from Southend to the centre of the universe.
The debate was of course dominated by covid. A number of hon. Members have said that it is not easy, and it is not. It is not easy for anybody. I was particularly pleased earlier today when the Secretary of State said in answer to my question that it is vital that we deal with the misinformation about the vaccine. We know that people have been deliberately targeted with misinformation, and it is important to deal with that.
Let us hope that the vaccine is rolled out, if for no other reason than to see the tartan army descend on Wembley stadium for the Euro championships and what I am sure will be an easy group game for Scotland.

Jim Shannon: Archie Gemmill.

Chris Stephens: The hon. Gentleman mentions Archie Gemmill. When I listened to the hon. Member for Ipswich (Tom Hunt), I was struck by the fact that there are none of those great Scottish players playing for Ipswich any more, like John Wark or George Burley. Perhaps there could be more Scottish signings that will raise Ipswich back to its rightful place in English football.
I am pleased that hon. Members have joined in a tradition, which I think I started, of praising, thanking and congratulating our constituency office staff. I want to thank Dominique, Christina, Greg, Keith, Scott, Tony and the great Roza Salih in the Glasgow South West office. I am quite clear that they are the best constituency office staff in these islands. Every single constituency office has had to deal with unprecedented pressures in the last year, and they have all been a credit not just to hon. Members of this House but to themselves.
I want to thank some constituency organisations for the work that they have done: G53 Together, Govan HELP, the Moogety food project, the Ridgeway Dairy with Drumoyne Community Council, the Trussell Trust and the Turf Youth Project. I particularly thank Feeding Britain, which invested £90,000 in the constituency this year on various projects.
Coming back to covid, there are a number of things that the Government will have to look at, and I hope that they will make permanent the £20 uplift in universal credit. That will help millions of people in this country. I help that they will also look at the recommendations of the Select Committee on Work and Pensions about replacing advances with non-repayable grants. That would help a number of people. It has been sad that a number of deductions—that is, the money that the DWP has been taking back—has increased during the covid crisis. That does not do the Department credit.
As many Members have said, I hope that the Government will find some solution to the 3 million excluded who do not receive Government support. It is important that there are Members across the House who believe that that needs to be done.
A number of hon. Members correctly praised public sector workers for their role during the covid crisis. I will be campaigning this year to ensure that there is no pay freeze for public sector workers. It is morally unjust and economically unsound. When public sector workers get their wages, they spend them in the private sector economy. If we are serious about helping the private sector along, I simply cannot fathom how a public sector pay freeze will help.
We also need to find a solution for the 1950s-born women. I know that hon. Members across the House see that injustice, which needs to be taken away. We need an employment Bill, which the Government have been promising for years, so that we can discuss issues about zero-hours contracts, which are prevalent in the hospitality sector. We need to deal with those issues.
I hope that the Government will start to bring issues to this place. In particular, the new immigration rules should have been brought to this Chamber for debate and discussion, as should the pilot that the Government have put in place for asylum seeker interviews. The Home Office has decided, without any reference to this Chamber, to allow Serco to carry out those interviews.
It would not be a speech from me without touching on one or two constitutional issues—[Laughter.] Just one or two. Today, we have another poll on Scottish independence—the 17th consecutive poll—showing yes ahead and that support for the Union is now at its lowest level. I want to thank every single Government Back Bencher for their part in that campaign.
Of course, other Members have mentioned Brexit. We do not know what kind of Brexit it will be, and it is quite ludicrous that we are going into recess today not knowing whether we are coming back next week or the week after. We are in a position of deal or no deal. I am half expecting Noel Edmonds to occupy the Front Bench with a telephone, seeing what the banker is going to come up with. It really is quite a shameful position. It just leaves me to say this. It is an old song: “We’ll meet again, don’t know where, don’t know when, but I’m sure we’ll meet again, some sunny day.”

Valerie Vaz: I thank all hon. Members who took part in the debate, particularly those who are celebrating their first anniversary. Who would have thought on 12 December 2019 that a year later they would have been through such incredible  times? They have been through a baptism of fire. It is hard enough to get to grips with setting up offices and so many other things coming at you. Talk about a confluence of events—not only Brexit, but covid-19. Congratulations to them all.
I thank my deputy, my hon. Friend the Member for Manchester, Gorton (Afzal Khan), who is unable to be here because he is shielding. He has done some good work on ministerial responses and we hope to publish that shortly.
The hon. Member for Filton and Bradley Stoke (Jack Lopresti) talked about a link road and transport. I hope he will get his meeting with the Prime Minister because transport is vital for productivity.
I agree with my hon. Friend the Member for Stockport (Navendu Mishra). I have been trying to reopen Pleck library in Walsall for years and it is sad that the leader of Walsall Council has said that all the libraries should be closed. I find that quite odd.
The hon. Member for Eastleigh (Paul Holmes) said he was a friend of the Deputy Chief Whip’s—that is a good thing to be. He rightly paid tribute to the health service and talked about the businesses and the breweries. I thought he was going to add that he had been on a pub crawl with the Deputy Chief Whip.

Paul Holmes: indicated assent.

Valerie Vaz: Oh he has! His secrets are coming out now. He should have said that in his speech.
My hon. Friend the Member for Hackney South and Shoreditch (Meg Hillier) rightly talked about Grenfell Tower and the cladding issue, which does not seem to be going away.
The hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington (Elliot Colburn) said that the highest number of people died this year. It is an incredible figure that we have had to face. As I have said before, every single one of us knows someone who has died as a result of covid. The hon. Gentleman also rightly focused on transport.
My hon. Friend the Member for Mitcham and Morden (Siobhain McDonagh) said that sometimes we do not see the effect of the work we do as Members of Parliament. We work for the future. She also focused on the children in her constituency, on their education and on the food that some of them are struggling to get hold of, which we would not expect. She rightly praised the work of UNICEF, despite what was said earlier in the day.
My hon. Friend the Member for Reading East (Matt Rodda) paid tribute to the Royal Berkshire Hospital, health and care workers and other public servants. As he said, we all work for the common good.
The hon. Member for Thurrock (Jackie Doyle-Price) made a good case for a port in her constituency and she told us how important our maritime history is, what we have done as a nation and our island story.
What can we say about the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon)? He is absolutely delightful. He is an institution. He gave us a great message of hope and love, including a very special prayer, and we thank him for that and wish him well.
I went to Burma with the hon. Member for Congleton (Fiona Bruce). She is an incredibly brave woman. She focused on the Human Rights Commission and I want  to join her in paying tribute to Benedict Rogers, who has done sterling work on that commission. He is incredibly brave—hon. Members should read his book on Burma and the description of how he was stopped at the airport and sometimes prevented from going in. I do not know how he did it.
We come to the hon. Member for Southend West (Sir David Amess). What can we say? In previous years, he used to go round his constituency and the joke among us all was that he did not need to send Christmas cards because he mentioned everybody. We hope that, come 2022, Southend will be a city. I think this is the start of a letter-writing campaign, and we will support the hon. Gentleman in every way we can.
The hon. Member for North West Durham (Mr Holden) mentioned motor homes and lavatories—an interesting combination; he has done well. However, he also mentioned the hospitality industry, which is on its knees and we need to ensure that we do something about it next year. I am sure that the Deputy Chief Whip has got a long note about the hospitality industry.
The hon. Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Aaron Bell) was right to mention the high street. As he is a member of the Science and Technology Committee, I am sure there is an inquiry he can have. I feel sure he was describing a statutory nuisance, so I think there is some way he could look at that. I recommend good solicitors such as Leigh Day, but I am not sure the Government like them much. They are very good—they are the greatest for the underdog.
The hon. Member for Wantage (David Johnston) is right about Royal Mail. Obviously, we have not been able to visit this year. He is also right about community hospitals. Wantage Community Hospital should be reopened. Again, everybody from the health and social care sector should be congratulated. I am sure he has a hotline to the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care.
I congratulate the hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent North (Jonathan Gullis) on the birth of Amelia. What a year! We have had some of the most stressful times, but Amelia is here and all good wishes to him and his wife. We will support any attempt for an honour for his constituent Rich Stephenson-Evans, with all the deliveries he has made during covid.
What an incredible story the hon. Member for Ipswich (Tom Hunt) gave us. It is right that we need to focus on special educational needs. I, too, make a plea to the deputy Chief Whip. It is an important area and the hon. Member is proof that you can succeed, no matter what you have, if you have a good education. I am sure his education was under a Labour Government, which made a massive investment in education. [Laughter.] We, too, want to see a deal. We are not sure where we are on whether it is a deal or no deal.
I once again thank all Members for responding to being thrown in at the deep end. I just want to mention my hon. Friend the Member for Ogmore (Chris Elmore), who has a very special event coming up. His wife, Bridie, is hopefully giving birth, so we might not see him after this, or he might be here because we might have to vote on something before 2021, but I want to thank him for casting all those hundreds of proxy votes.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I had my opportunity to thank everyone earlier. May I wish you, and everyone in this House, a very happy Christmas and a peaceful new year?

Kate Green: On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. In response to my point of order earlier this afternoon about the return of schools in January, Madam Deputy Speaker reminded us that Mr Speaker expects statements from Ministers to be brought first to this House. At 2.20 pm or thereabouts, the Department for Education issued a press release on schools’ return, yet it took until nearly 4.30 pm for a written ministerial statement to be laid before the House. Parents, teachers and school leaders cannot possibly plan for January in the face of this Government chaos. Mr Deputy Speaker, with the House due to rise for the Christmas recess in just a very few minutes, how can right hon. and hon. Members have the opportunity to question Ministers about what on earth is happening?

Nigel Evans: I thank the hon. Lady for her point of order and her forward notice of it. The Government have laid written ministerial statements in both Houses on the subject this afternoon. However, I am sure that Ministers on the Treasury Bench will have heard what the hon. Lady has had to say. We are approaching the time of new year resolutions and I can think of one for those on the Government Benches straightaway on that matter, so I am extremely grateful to her for that.
We now move to—as we are giving full titles—the Treasurer of Her Majesty’s Household. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear.”] I am just wondering whether, with that amazing tie that I have been admiring for the last hour, some of the coffers from the Household have gone on it. I think we are just about to be told. I call Stuart Andrew.

Stuart Andrew: Thank you very much, Mr Deputy Speaker. I am not going comment on the tie or where it may have come from.
It is always a pleasure to take part in these debates. We have heard from colleagues from across the House raising all sorts of issues whether they be international, national or local. Every one of them has clearly been heartfelt and I thank them for their contributions. I, too, want to pay tribute to those Members who are new to this House. It is always difficult getting used to this place, but in this difficult year it really has been a challenge. I think they have, on all sides of the House—I mean this sincerely—done that with great professionalism. I hope that next year we can get back to some sort of normality, so that they can enjoy the rest of what this House is really like.
I would like to comment on a couple of issues that were raised. My hon. Friend the Member for Filton and Bradley Stoke (Jack Lopresti) mentioned that he wants a meeting with the Prime Minister. I am not going to commit to putting a slot in the Prime Minister’s diary, but I will certainly make reference to that and inform my right hon. Friend.
The hon. Member for Stockport (Navendu Mishra) quite rightly spoke about libraries and paid tribute to them. I have been quite impressed myself; I have a community library in Rawdon in my own constituency, which is now fully supported by volunteers who do tremendous amounts of work. Of course, this is a good time of year to get children in particular looking at books, with books such as “Cinderella”, “Dick Whittington”,  “Snow White”, “Sleeping Beauty” and “Jack and the Beanstalk”—all the panto things that we can encourage them to start reading.
I am going to come on to my hon. Friend—or he was —the Member for Eastleigh (Paul Holmes). He gave a very long list of things he wants. Father Christmas at the moment is preparing all his reindeer—Prancer, Dasher, Rudolph, Dancer, Vixen, Comet, Cupid, Donner and Blitzen—to supply gifts to the children of this planet for their good behaviour; all I can say to my hon. Friend is that, if he carries on behaving well, he may be lucky in getting some of those gifts that he wants for his constituency.
However, my hon. Friend is right to raise some important issues. We have invested more than £280 billion in this very difficult year to support businesses up and down the country. It has been hugely challenging. He was right to raise the levelling-up fund, and I can assure him that it will be for all parts of the country. There is £4 billion there that is part of the wider £600 billion of infrastructure funding that we will be doing over the next five years.
My hon. Friend also quite rightly mentioned independent lifeboats. We have become dependent on charities in many walks of life and they do tremendous amounts of work. I pay tribute to all of them and the Government are doing what they can to help.
The hon. Member for Hackney South and Shoreditch (Meg Hillier) raised the very important issue of cladding. I do not think any of us will ever forget the horrific scenes we saw at Grenfell. I know that Ministers are constantly working on that; 80% of the dangerous cladding has been removed, but there is more to do, and I will certainly make sure that that is raised with my ministerial colleagues.

Julian Lewis: Although I did not make a speech in this debate, I enjoyed the others greatly and I did make a short intervention. Will my hon. Friend take back to the Government the dangers of allowing free rein to graft extra top floors on to high-rise blocks with limited planning requirements? I have personal experience, as I said, and it is a disaster in the making. We should not be encouraging it.

Stuart Andrew: I will certainly make sure that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State is made aware of those concerns. I know that planning is an issue that we will be discussing a lot over the coming months.
My hon. Friend the Member for Carshalton and Wallington (Elliot Colburn) quite rightly mentioned the small shops. I hope that, as we come out of the pandemic, there will be a real opportunity for many of our small town centres. Of course, the town centre fund will help us to achieve that. I am also glad that he mentioned the important issue of domestic violence; I think the Domestic Abuse Bill is one of the best things we have done in this Parliament for some time.
The hon. Member for Mitcham and Morden (Siobhain McDonagh) mentioned children having food. I will say clearly that I do not think there is anybody in this House who does not want to see our children have food—I was in receipt of free school meals myself, so I know how challenging it can be for families—but how we achieve that is sometimes an area of debate. That is  why this Government are trying to do that through a targeted approach, so that the neediest children receive that help, and we will continue to do so.
The hon. Member for Reading East (Matt Rodda), like many others, thanked our voluntary groups and the many key workers who have worked incredibly hard to ensure that all the services run as best they can in these challenging times. I must say that I dispute his call for us to look at the Christmas rules again; personal responsibility will allow us and our families to have some time together in what has been a very difficult year.
My hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock (Jackie Doyle-Price) reminded me a little of Queen Elizabeth I, who was at Tilbury fort, and I can imagine that my hon. Friend will be rallying the troops to ensure that her bid for a freeport is successful. From listening to the impressive amount of work that the partnership has been doing, I hope that their bid will be looked at with great interest by Ministers. Bidding closes on 5 February, so we will wait and see. I am sure she will be popping the champagne. [Interruption.] I cannot give that commitment, but let us hope she will be popping the champagne—that is how I had better put it.
The hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) is, as always, the most courteous man. He appears in every debate that happens, whether here or in Westminster Hall. I was somewhat surprised once when I was leading a debate on HS2 to see him walking in, as I was thinking, “How on earth are we going to connect London to Leeds and then across to Northern Ireland?” However, he managed to get a perfect intervention in. My hon. Friend the Member for Congleton (Fiona Bruce) talked about the serious human rights issues and, of course, what is going on in China. It is absolutely right, as was mentioned, that we raise these issues here. The Government are working with all our international partners to ensure that we speak up where there are human rights abuses.
Now I come on to the masterclass from my hon. Friend the Member for Southend West (Sir David Amess). If I were to try to answer everything he raised, we would be here until new year’s eve. However, I will ensure that, as he wanted, he gets a reply to the letter he sent. He raised very important issues, including, of course, the city status one. My little briefing note here may give him some cause for an opportunity, as it says, “The Cabinet Office continues to explore whether there is an appropriate royal occasion on which to hold a city status competition.” We all know that there is one coming, so let us see whether he is finally successful. I have no idea what he will talk about afterwards if that ever happens.
My hon. Friend the Member for North West Durham (Mr Holden) certainly showed what a busy year he has had, and, yes, I was intrigued by the combination of motor homes, tax relief and public toilets. I am glad that he mentioned the private Members’ Bills, and I want to thank him for the support he gave to our colleague my right hon. Friend the Member for Chesham and Amersham (Dame Cheryl Gillan) with her private Member’s Bill. I am her Whip and I know that she was extremely grateful for that support. He also mentioned dull Christmas lights. I can tell him that we had the same problem in my constituency, but through a lot of hard work from community volunteers we have been able to change a lot of the town. The only problem I would warn him about is that this results in your being up ladders in the freezing cold of November, but it is worth doing.
My hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Aaron Bell) raised the serious issue of landfill in his constituency. Clearly, this is not a very pleasant experience for those residents, and I will raise the matter with my colleagues in the relevant Department. I say to the company involved that it really should engage. I think we can all say that companies that engage effectively with our communities certainly get a better response.
I am running out of time so I had better finish by saying that my hon. Friends the Members for Wantage (David Johnston), for Stoke-on-Trent North (Jonathan Gullis) and for Ipswich (Tom Hunt) all gave great speeches about their constituencies. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Stoke-on-Trent North on the birth of Amelia. I am also glad that my hon. Friend the Member for Ipswich raised the issue of special educational needs, because I have always believed it is an important area where we can get the very best opportunities for everybody.
I want to finish by wishing the whole House a very happy Christmas. Happy Christmas to you, Mr Deputy Speaker, to Mr Speaker and to the other Deputy Speakers. On behalf of the whole House, we would like to thank all Members, the peers, the staff of the House, civil servants, security, cleaners, broadcasting, Hansard, catering and the doorkeepers, who always keep us in order—mainly. They have been helping to keep Parliament working safely during what has been an incredibly difficult time in this pandemic. We also thank Members’ staff, who have sometimes had to face a lot of abuse—that is just not on, and they do so with such good grace. We have done a lot in this pandemic: 188 Divisions have happened; and 190 statutory instruments have been passed since March. That is thanks to everybody who has worked so hard. So I wish everybody a very happy Christmas, and let us hope for a much better new year.
Question put and agreed to.
Resolved,
That this House has considered matters to be raised before the forthcoming adjournment.

Nigel Evans: On behalf of Mr Speaker and his team, I would like to thank everybody Stuart just mentioned, particularly the technicians, who have worked incredible miracles to ensure that the democracy we have here has been able to operate. It has been an awful year, but it has created angels and heroes, and we salute them, topped by the national health service and the scientists who have created a vaccine, which has given us all so much hope that 2021 will be a much better year. I will stop short of saying, “all I want for Christmas is you”—I am not going to ask for miracles—but I do know that all I want for the new year is that everyone who needs a jab gets one, in order that we can get our country and the world back to where we were. Merry Christmas everybody, and a happy new year.

Petition - Preserving Piles Coppice Wood

5 pm

Zarah Sultana: I rise to present a petition on behalf of the residents of Coventry South regarding Piles Coppice wood, an area of woodland to the south-east of Coventry. There is an online petition on the same topic, which has been signed by just under 1,500 people.
The petition states:
The petition of residents of the constituency of Coventry South,
Declares that Piles Coppice Wood is a valuable remnant of ancient woodland that is home to rare and beautiful wildlife and vegetation; and notes residents’ fear that Warwickshire Wildlife Trust’s plans would damage the woodland.
The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urge the Government to preserve this ancient woodland and protect our natural environment.
And the petitioners remain, etc.
[P002641]

Free Sanitary Products in Schools

Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—(Eddie Hughes.)
5.1 pm

Ruth Cadbury: It is my honour to have what might be the last debate in this parliamentary year, and I thank Mr Speaker for granting it.
Over half the population expect to have periods most months from roughly their early teens until some point in their 40s or 50s. If you are lucky, you know when to expect your period and what it will be like. You can have the pads, tampons or whatever you use ready to hand. If you are lucky, you can afford to buy supplies or have supportive parents to ensure that you do. If you are lucky as a young person, particularly when you have your first period, you will have someone supportive who you can trust to go to with all your questions.
But that is not true for everyone, particularly for too many school students, and this debate is about them. They need to have access to free menstrual supplies that are easily accessible when they need them, so that they do not miss school either through embarrassment or because they are not prepared to spend the rest of their day relying on toilet paper in their underpants.
I would like to start by thanking Members who attended the inaugural meeting of the all-party parliamentary group on period equality on 1 December. I was pleased to be elected as chair, and I thank the Father of the House, the hon. Member for Worthing West (Sir Peter Bottomley), as well as my hon. Friends the Members for Oldham East and Saddleworth (Debbie Abrahams) and for Luton South (Rachel Hopkins), who all agreed to be officers of the APPG.
I pay tribute to the amazing work done in this place on the issue of period poverty by my friend, the former Member for Dewsbury, Paula Sherriff. In considering the Government’s free period products scheme, I would like to pay tribute to those who have got us and the Government to where we are. There have there been so many activists, but I pay particular tribute to the charity Free Periods, including its founder, Amika George, and Gemma and Hannah, who have been campaigning tirelessly on this issue. I would also like to thank all the other groups across the country, often local and community-based groups. Yeliz Kazim, the lead volunteer with Hounslow Red Box project, worked tirelessly to ensure that schools and others local centres across the borough of Hounslow had access to period products from 2017 until last year when the Government scheme came in.

Chris Elmore: I congratulate my hon. Friend on securing such an important debate. Several campaigns were started some years ago, before the schemes from the Governments in Scotland and Wales, and indeed the UK Government, came in, and they included one called Wings Cymru in my constituency, which was led by several of my constituents. One who springs to mind is Ceri Reeves, who collected sanitary products and distributed them around schools. Wings Cymru became such a large organisation that it started to distribute them around the further education colleges as well. Those community campaigns—in Wings Cymru’s case, all women—have been out there collecting, delivering and ensuring that young women and girls have that  security to be able to carry on their education, and it is those organisations and people who have made the difference, and who have made Ministers listen and ensured that we have the funding to support them.

Ruth Cadbury: My hon. Friend gives a brilliant description of a project in his constituency, and I know there are many others across the UK that, like the Hounslow Red Box scheme and Wings Cymru, are run by volunteers. They raise money, buy period products and deliver them in their distinctive red boxes, often with valuable and informative health leaflets. Hounslow Red Box also included clean new pants, tights and deodorant.

Jim Shannon: I congratulate the hon. Lady on bringing forward the debate. I have supported the campaign in my own constituency by making sure that Ards and North Down Borough Council is bringing in the procedures that it needs to. It might be of some help to her, and hopefully to the Minister, to know that my colleague, the Northern Ireland Assembly Education Minister, Peter Weir, will shortly be submitting a document on provision for tackling period poverty in schools to the Northern Ireland Executive, and is looking forward to its roll-out in 2021. Does the hon. Lady not agree that more Departments should assess their role in combating period poverty, and that perhaps even here on the mainland we should have the same thing as we are going to have in Northern Ireland very shortly?

Ruth Cadbury: The hon. Gentleman raises an important issue. This is about more than just schools and more than just one part of the UK.
My focus today is on education, but this issue has much wider implications. It is vital that free period products are available in all sorts of venues and facilities, from leisure centres and community spaces to workplaces and further education colleges—in fact, anywhere where there are likely to be people on low incomes who might be caught short and need access.
Scotland led the way last month by passing a Bill that will ensure that free period products are available in all public places. It was moved by Labour’s Monica Lennon MSP, but supported by all parties and passed with no opposition. In Monica’s recent speech in the Scottish Parliament, she was absolutely right to say that the passage of that Bill showed that Parliament could be a force for good. She said:
“Our prize is the opportunity to consign period poverty to history. In these dark times, we can bring light and hope to the world”.—[Scottish Parliament Official Report, 24 November 2020; c. 76.]
As chair of the APPG, I am looking forward to having Monica speak at our next meeting and seeing how something similar could be brought in in England.
In England, following the success of the Red Box schemes and campaigners, the Government finally brought in a scheme to introduce free period products to schools, which was rolled out in January. The schools have to ask to get access to the scheme. Our concern was that if there was insufficient take-up by schools, the funding would be pulled and the scheme would end, so we have been encouraging Members to contact their schools about this. It is not often I say that I am pleased with this Government lately, but I am really pleased that, last night, they announced that the scheme would be extended through the full 2021 calendar year. That is very welcome.
As I said, the scheme is being taken up by schools across the country, including many in my constituency. I know from speaking to young people that it has made a huge difference and they really appreciate it. There are fundamental reasons why the scheme is so important. We know what it is like to be in a toilet where there is no paper. Having no pad or tampon to hand when your period arrives is the same feeling. Of course, it is far worse for young people without the cash to buy them.
We need to ensure that any such free period product scheme has three key attributes: we need to remove the stigma around period products; we need to remove the postcode lottery that has meant that people have relied on charities and even teaching staff to provide free products—they should be available in all schools; and, most importantly, we need to ensure that no student misses out on time in the classroom because they have their period but no menstrual protection.
A 2019 report found that half of those who said they had missed schooling because of their period had done so because they could not afford to pay for period products. I am concerned that the coronavirus is fuelling this inequality even further. The problem might now be even greater, as the new figures coming in show that the pandemic has plunged more families into poverty. We know that we have a serious problem in this country when UNICEF is funding work here.
An important part of the scheme—and, indeed, of this whole debate—is tackling stigma and making it not only okay but perfectly acceptable and normal to discuss issues relating to periods. I am glad that this place has got much better in recent years, although I found out that the words “tampon” or “sanitary towel” were not used here until May 1987—and that was in relation airport security. Despite the title of this debate, Paula Sherriff reminded me today that we should not be using the word “sanitary”. Let us get away from the idea that menstrual products and menstruation implies uncleanliness; having a period is not dirty or unsanitary, although without protection it is messy.
Let me address the uptake of the Government’s free period products scheme in schools. The figures show us that by August only 40% of schools had signed up; will the Minister tell us the current level of take-up? In response to a written question, the Minister said,
“we are continuing to monitor orders closely”,
so I hope she will be able to provide further information. It is so important that schools sign up, which they can do so easily by going to the Free Periods website, which has a useful guide and toolkit to help schools. It also offers help on how to lobby MPs and on how MPs can encourage their local schools to take up the scheme. I have been working hard to make the scheme available in local schools, as have my colleagues, but MPs can do so much more.
Funding into next year would be much appreciated, but I have some other requests of the Government. It should not be left to charities such as Free Periods to do the heavy lifting in promoting the scheme when the Department for Education has a much louder megaphone to use. I know that the Department says:
“We intend to publish positive stories from organisations that have benefitted from the scheme”,
but I would like to know what the Government have been doing beyond that. What urgent work has been and is being done to promote the scheme directly in schools?
It has been such a tough year for schools and staff, and heads have had more than enough to deal with, so the easier take-up is made, the better. When I met one local headteacher, she told me about the difficulty they had in understanding the reams of directives that arrive every week; let us make it easier so that this is not yet another hurdle they have to jump. I hope the Minister will take that back to the Department.
As we end this year, I wish to speak about the future of the scheme. I hope the Minister will outline in further detail the plans for next year. Will the same amount of funding be available as was available for this past year? If schools do not use all their allocated funding by the end of the year, will they be able to roll it over and use it in future? The success of the scheme rests on as many schools as possible signing up to it. When the scheme was launched, the Minister responsible at the time, the hon. Member for Chippenham (Michelle Donelan), who is now the Minister for Universities, said that the Government would consider making the scheme mandatory if take-up was not high enough. What level of take-up does the Minister think is acceptable? Does the Department have any plans to make it an opt-out rather than opt-in scheme?
Will the Government draw on our Red Box experience in Hounslow and consider extending the scheme to include other products, such as pants and tights? They are particularly valuable, because it is one thing to have a clean pad or tampon, but another to have to put back on the same pants and tights. That is certainly what the volunteers in our Red Box scheme put in, because of the feedback from students and schools. I hope that when the Minister gives her response, she will set out what the plans for the scheme are and what changes there will be.
While I congratulate the Government on their decision to continue the scheme, it is certainly not the end of the issue of access to free period products generally, as I have said. As the Scottish example shows, there are other venues and places where people, particularly those with no money or very little money, get help and support, such as food banks, citizens advice bureaux and those who support refugees. I have often visited these sorts of projects and places and they are wonderful people doing wonderful things—they provide food, they often provide razors and they provide toys for children—but sometimes they do not provide period products. I think that that needs to be considered because, as I say, period products are as necessary as food to eat and toilet paper.
Finally, Mr Deputy Speaker, as this is the official end of the parliamentary year, I wish you and your team, all the staff of Parliament, who support us, all our parliamentary staff and other Members here—those who are left—a happy, peaceful and restful Christmas. Here is hoping that 2021 is a happier year.

Nigel Evans: Thank you, Ruth.

Vicky Ford: I congratulate the hon. Member for Brentford and Isleworth (Ruth Cadbury) on securing a debate on  such an important topic. We are absolutely committed to providing world-class education, training and care for everyone, and no one—no young person—should be held back from reaching their potential because of their gender or background.
The onset of menstruation can be confusing and even alarming, especially if the child or young person is not adequately prepared. At such a challenging time, it is vital that our students get the help and support that they need to access period products. After all, how can young people engage in their learning if they are worried about being caught out? Two years ago, in Parliament Week, members of the guides from Essex told me that this was happening to girls in my constituency—they were missing school because of their period—and I joined Members from across both sides of the House in campaigning for free period products in schools.
Back in 2019, in the spring statement, I was delighted when the Government committed to making free period products available in education. Last January, we rolled out a scheme so that students in primary schools, secondary schools and colleges across England have been able to access free period products in their place of study when they need them. I am delighted that we are extending that support until next December.
Our period product scheme helps young people to go about their daily lives without getting caught out if they come on their period unexpectedly and have forgotten to bring products with them, or if they cannot afford the products they need. Ordering the products is easy. Schools and colleges can log on to an online portal and order a range of products from our supplier, PHS, as and when they need them. This demonstrates an effective use of public funds and allows us to base spend on demand rather than making assumptions about take-up.
Periods are a very personal experience and young people inevitably have a range of priorities when it comes to selecting the most appropriate product, including whether it is familiar to them, comfortable and environmentally friendly. In research commissioned by the Department, young people felt that the scheme should prioritise the comfort of learners, and therefore we offer a wide range of products. Our product range includes environmentally friendly tampons and pads alongside reusable products such as menstrual cups and reusable pads. Schools and colleges have the freedom to select the most suitable products, considering cost and type of products. Once the products have been delivered free of charge, schools and colleges decide how these are made available to learners.
I encourage all organisations to review our guidance, which was developed through consultation with stakeholders, including campaigns such as the Red Box Project and the Department’s life skills division, alongside commissioned research with learners. It explains the simple steps required to order the products and gives advice on how to ensure that they are effectively distributed.
A vital element of the scheme is ensuring that learners are aware that the products are available when they need them. It can be challenging for some schools and colleges to communicate, especially where teachers and students find it difficult to talk openly about periods. Periods are a natural process, but too often a stigma is associated with menstruation. We are taking action to tackle that  through the new health education curriculum, which became compulsory for pupils in all state-funded schools in England from September this year.
Our statutory guidance instructs that both boys and girls should be taught key facts about the menstrual cycle, including what is an average period, the range of period products and the implications for emotional and physical health. We have developed a “Changing adolescent body” teacher training module, which sets out what should be covered in primary and secondary education regarding menstrual health and wellbeing.
I want teachers to feel confident in working with their students to tackle the stigma around menstruation. Over the coming year, we will evaluate the uptake of training around the relationship, sex and health education curriculum and ask teachers how they feel about delivering it. Periods can be particularly challenging for some learners, and we will give further consideration as to whether it would be appropriate to provide additional guidance to schools around, for example, endometriosis.
Beyond the health education curriculum content, our statutory guidance directs schools to make adequate and sensitive arrangements to help girls prepare for and manage periods, including requests for period products. Even small changes, such as using the term “period products”, rather than “sanitary products” can help shift the conversation from the suggestion that menstruation is unhygienic.
The great work of the Government in supporting people with menstruation is not limited to schools and colleges. Since 2015, we have awarded £15 million through the tampon tax fund to support vulnerable and excluded women and girls. Projects that are being supported this year include ones that work to support victims of domestic abuse and eating disorder sufferers and offer mentoring for disadvantaged young women.
Last year, the Government launched a cross-sectoral period poverty taskforce to develop sustainable expert solutions to end period poverty and shame in the UK. Alongside that, NHS England has announced that it will offer period products to every hospital patient who needs them, and the Home Office changed the law to ensure that all people in custody are provided with health and hygiene products for free, including period products.
The Department for International Development announced a global campaign of action to end period poverty and shame by 2030, which was kick-started with an allocation of up to £2 million for small and medium charities working on period poverty and shame in our priority countries. From 1 January next year, the Chancellor has made it clear that a zero rate of VAT will apply to period products.
Since our period product scheme launched in January, it has been fantastic to see many schools and colleges using the scheme. It has remained in operation throughout the period of partial closures of schools and colleges. Even with the challenges of the pandemic, in August PHS reported that almost 40% of eligible organisations had ordered products through the scheme. Orders have increased significantly since schools and colleges reopened fully in September, and the Department will publish management information from the period product scheme on 21 January next year, once the scheme has operated for 12 months.
In the light of the benefits I have outlined, I am pleased to confirm that the scheme will continue until next December, with all eligible schools and colleges receiving new spend cap allocations on 4 January next year. We are clear that organisations should have products available should learners need them. We also know that many schools and colleges have benefited from the support of charities over recent years, and I thank those organisations for their support.
Schools and colleges do not have to use the national scheme to purchase products if they prefer to use an alternative route, although the costs are only met if they use the Department’s scheme. With that in mind, our supplier PHS will proactively contact those schools and colleges that have not accessed the scheme. Organisations that have already ordered products should continue to use their existing account and login details. The contact details for PHS and more information about the scheme are clearly set out in guidance on gov.uk.
This is an issue that mostly affects women and girls, and as this may be the last debate of the year, I would like to end it by thanking a few of the inspirational women I have been honoured to come across this year. First, I would like to thank Helen Waite, who runs the period product scheme at the Department for Education. She also set up the free school meals voucher scheme during covid, and right now she is working flat out to launch our holiday activity and food schemes across all of England for vulnerable children in the Easter, summer and Christmas holidays next year.
I would like to thank Sarah Lewis, the director at the DFE who is Helen’s line manager and also manages the early years team. She has been an inspirational leader in a difficult year, and today is her last day in the Department as she is going to work on the frontline of education.  We will miss her greatly, but I know that the frontline will benefit greatly too. I would also like to thank our new permanent secretary, Susan Acland-Hood, who has made such a big difference in the Department since joining us.
I thank Dame Christine Lenehan from the Council for Disabled Children, and Tina Emery, the co-chair of the National Network of Parent Carer Forums. They do inspirational work to support children and young people with disabilities and have made sure that these very vulnerable children have certainly not been forgotten during this pandemic.
Thank you to Jenny Coles, the president of the Association of Directors of Children’s Services; to Isabelle Trowler, the chief social worker; and to social workers all across the country, many of whom are women, for the work that they do, again, to support vulnerable children and their families. Lastly, I would like to thank Anne Longfield, the Children’s Commissioner, for her very hard-working years of service. I have no doubt that our preferred candidate to be her successor, Dame Rachel de Souza, will continue that excellent work.
Finally, I say to girls all across the country: this has been a year of huge disruption, but do not miss out on your education because you have your period. Make sure your school or college signs up to our period product scheme. You are our future, and awesome women all across the country are backing you all the way. Merry Christmas.
Question put and agreed to.
House adjourned.